Election denial, left and right
A while back, commenter “Bauxite” wondered:
I think there is something missing from leftists. Behaving the way they behave now while “forgetting” about the last three times a Republican has won the presidency destroys their creditibility and the credibility of the institutions that we all need (and that progressives especially need to achieve their objectives.)
Maybe they’ve grown so used to the media acting as the propaganda arm of the Democratic party that they are beginning to believe their own BS. How can any minimally informed person not understand that Stacey Abrahms looks like a fool when she criticizes Trump for denying election results?
I think I can answer that question. For some, it is a case of 2+2=5; that is, believing what the Party says. Republicans questioning election results means Republicans are bad, and Democrats questioning election results means it’s okay to do so because Democrats are good. But for a lot of Democrats it’s not that. For example, I can almost guarantee that the majority of my Democrat-voting friends either do not even know who Stacey Abrams is (or if they know now, they didn’t know who she was the first time she ran for governor), or do not know what she claimed about the election of 2018. It’s a detail that isn’t on their radar screens.
But if they do happen to know those details, they would claim it’s a different order of denial. It’s not a denial resting on a claim of over-inclusion – in other words, Abrams didn’t claim that too many “people” voted fraudulently, including dead people or non-existent people. That’s the sort of claim Republicans make. Instead, her denial rested on a claim of under-inclusion – that is, exclusion. And that exclusion was in turn based on a claim of systemic racism in the voting system.
So to them, the claims would not be equivalent. The principle on their banner is not that every challenge of voting results is bad. The principle is that there are noble challenges (which are challenges that claim exclusion and particularly racial exclusion) and there are base challenges (challenges that claim cheating and over-inclusion, particularly cheating on the part of people of color in big cities such as Atlanta or Philadelphia and therefore are racist challenges).
As for the claims about the presidential vote in 2016, that was a claim by Democrats that rested on Russian influence, which in turn rested on an uncharacteristic demonization of Russia, a foreign country that until that moment had elicited little anger from Democrats. After all, as Obama said, the 80s had called and wanted their foreign policy back. Nevertheless, for those who already hated Trump – which meant most Democrats – it was a convenient fiction that allowed them to call him an illegitimate president and to mount an instant Resistance.
And what was the difference between that Resistance and the January 6th supposed insurrection? I think most people on the right give insufficient emphasis to the very real although erroneous belief among Democrats that January 6th was an armed, bloody, lethal, white-supremacist insurrection that is ongoing and must be fought with every tool fair or foul. For very many Democrats, the riots in 2017 at the Trump inauguration are either quite literally forgotten, or are considered mere demonstrations of the ordinary sort. The post-Floyd riots in 2020 are either quite literally forgotten or remembered as “mostly peaceful,” and at any rate did not involve an “armed insurrection invading the Capitol” in order to stop a “duly elected” president from taking office. That last description of January 6th is the one they believe is the truth, and there is no exact parallel in the riots that came at the hands of the left.
The perception of January 6th that way is vital to the claims the left is now making. That’s why the coverage right from the start was so unified and so over-the-top: it was a lethal insurrection. And that is very widely believed to this day. If January 6th was in fact engineered by the FBI, aided by the failure to have enough security that day, as some on the right have asserted and that may be true, it was a brilliant and coordinated move that served its purpose quite well.
Neo: this post is brilliant. All of it; but particularly this bit:
“So to them, the claims would not be equivalent. The principle on their banner is not that every challenge of voting results is bad. The principle is that there are noble challenges (which are challenges that claim exclusion and particularly racial exclusion) and there are base challenges (challenges that claim cheating and over-inclusion, particularly cheating on the part of people of color in big cities such as Atlanta or Philadelphia and therefore are racist challenges).”
I think I have a reasonably good BS meter, and I had long sensed the hypocrisy of the Dems on many issues, election denial not least among them. But I had never found the right words to absolutely nail them for it. Here, you have done so. Thanks.
I’ll second Owen’s praise. The most concise summary of the thinking I encounter by D acquaintances which has always confused me.
Well yes.
Clearly, in certain cases causing hyper-inflation is noble; as is perverting education and subverting the family, as is corrupting the political system and weaponizing the justice system, as is eroding the military and tribalizing society.
As is demolishing trust wherever it can be weeded out.
As is destroying the country…
Vote the Democratic Party ticket in Nov. 2022! (and forever after…i.e., as long as the country continues to exist…)
I’d say neo nailed this one too.
I appreciate the nuance. The left is not entirely crazy nor intentionally trying to destroy America. However, they are reasoning carelessly from often false or questionable premises and facts plus incomplete contexts. Also, they bring strong emotions to bear.
Not a recipe for clear thinking. Nor does it work well in fair debates.
I lost very few debates with leftists back in the 2000s before they moved to their censor, deplatform, shout down and cancel strategies we see today.
“…nor intentionally trying to destroy America…”
Well that’s a relief!
– – – – – – – – – – –
Something of interest, perhaps:
“Judge orders Fauci, Biden officials to be deposed in social media collusion case”
https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/judge-orders-fauci-biden-officials-sit-deposition-media-collusion-case
Wonder if POTUS will have any spare time from his busy schedule…
“Joe Biden’s priorities: trans activists at the White House”—
https://hotair.com/david-strom/2022/10/21/joe-bidens-priorities-trans-activists-at-the-white-house-n504926
Maybe this guy should also receive a WH invite! (“overcoming monumental obstacles”, “defying senseless prejudice”, etc.)…
“Horrific moment female high school volleyball player suffers serious head injury after transgender girl in rival team lobbed** ’70mph’ ball at her head and struck her”—
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11342755/Female-high-school-volleyball-player-suffers-head-injury-transgender-girl-lobbed-ball.html
** “…lobbed…” should be “…spiked…” (well, it IS the Daily Mail, after all…)
This is a great analysis, Neo. We’re dealing with two different realities. Leftist “facts” make their positions defensible, and most of them will not permit any competing facts to be introduced.
neo: The principle is that there are noble challenges (which are challenges that claim exclusion and particularly racial exclusion) and there are base challenges (challenges that claim cheating and over-inclusion, particularly cheating on the part of people of color in big cities such as Atlanta or Philadelphia and therefore are racist challenges).
Except there is no evidence to support any large scale fraud in the election process.
But there is a history of racial exclusion and evidence of continuing systemic racism in voting, such as fewer voting locations per capita in minority areas and consequently longer lines, making it especially hard for working people and single parents to vote. Part of it is the peculiar system in many states of having a partisan act to oversee elections, even when the partisan is running for election, which entrenches the existing power structure.
neo: As for the claims about the presidential vote in 2016, that was a claim by Democrats that rested on Russian influence . . . which meant most Democrats – it was a convenient fiction
Russia hacked the DNC and Clinton campaign, then released the emails for maximum damage to the Clinton campaign. Russia also had an army of trolls using social media to manipulate public opinion in the U.S. The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee found that the Trump campaign welcomed the interference, and that contacts between Russian agents and members of the Trump campaign constituted a grave danger to national security.
Wrong blog, buster….
Zachriel,
Repeating lies relentlessly won’t make them true. No matter how hard you squeeze your eyes shut and click your ruby slippers.
I am mildly curious whether you know better and just enjoy lying or are you really are that ignorant and deluded.
Facts matter. Try some next time.
Prof Reynolds is correct.
https://nypost.com/2022/10/21/after-the-jan-6-committee-finishes-maybe-a-gop-congress-can-probe-some-actual-threats-to-democracy/
More worth a read:
https://michaelshellenberger.substack.com/p/the-quiet-desperation-of-woke-fanatics
https://jeffgoldstein.substack.com/p/the-age-of-boutique-authoritarianism?utm_source=direct&r=gpupi&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/10/court-fauci-must-testify-under-oath-about-involvement-in-social-media-covid-censorship/
https://pjmedia.com/uncategorized/jeff-reynolds/2022/10/20/former-pjtv-filmmaker-investigated-by-fbi-as-domestic-terrorist-for-j6-documentary-n1636605
Apropos of the election fraud factor, Trump fires warning shot at Pompeo and Pence: ‘Very disloyal’ if Cabinet members run in 2024
The volume of evidence supporting the notion that the 2020 election was stolen makes addressing that issue one way or another a top ethical ethical priority. Given Trump’s apparent intent to run, it would be foolish and divisive within the GOP for anyone to challenge him in 2024.
Note: Much thanks to whoever pointed out my erroneous link in a previous comment. My full-time job often leaves me squeezed for time, but I will more closely check urls from here on.
Have you Democrat-voting friends forgotten 2000?
On January 6th, 2001; every member of the Congressional Black Caucus objected to seating Florida’s electors.
Here is CNN in 2015: So, who really won? What the Bush v. Gore studies showed
I understand the concept “noble challenges”, but the counting of the 2020 election stopped the Saturday after Election Day, the moment the count showed Biden won. No recounts into December. No studies were allowed in 2021. You can’t get away with claims of being noble, when only 1 week was allowed to look at the votes.
Then again, these are Democrats, and I just read one at Althouse claiming that didn’t recall Democrats calling for “defunding the police”. They know. They just don’t care about lying to you.
Speaking of; do you know for all the claims of “continuing systemic racism in voting, such as fewer voting locations per capita in minority areas and consequently longer lines”; more votes than ever before keep getting cast each election. 3 million more votes were cast in 2016 than 2012 for President. 20 million more votes in 2020 than 2016. As I said, they just don’t care about lying to you.
BTW, ever noticed how happy the Hillary Clinton campaign was with British intelligence interfering with the 2016 election?
Wonder if the latest troll crawl has a direct cause, e.g., Democratic Party DESPERATION?
OTOH, who knows if any of the following is accurate?
(And on the third hand, why shouldn’t one assume that the Democrats will—once again—just draw out the vote “counting” for as long as it takes until their candidate “wins”??)
“”Poll shows Zeldin pulling ahead of Hochul in New York governor’s race”—
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/poll-shows-zeldin-pulling-ahead-hochul-new-york-governors-race
“Democrat squeeze grows: Poll show close governor’s race in traditionally blue Illinois”—
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/illinois-quick-hits-poll-has-illinois-governors-race-close
“Blue cities bleeding: Homicide rates surging in major cities run by Soros-backed DAs”—
https://justthenews.com/nation/crime/homicide-rates-surging-major-cities-run-soros-backed-das
“Findings of nursing home voter fraud spur conservative groups to join forces to protect seniors”—
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/after-nursing-home-voter-fraud-conservative-orgs-join-together-protect
“Doctor who gave Fetterman a clean bill of health is campaign donor, Democratic funder”—
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/doctor-who-gave-fetterman-clean-bill-health-campaign-donor-democratic
“GOP governors push back as CDC adds COVID vax to immunization schedule despite data on risk to kids”—
https://justthenews.com/government/state-houses/gop-governors-candidates-rebuff-addition-covid-vaccines-childhood
“Record 2.4 million migrants illegally crossed border in FY2022, almost 4 million total under Biden”—
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/border-encounters-reach-record-nearly-24-million-fy2022-over-4-million
“Scorn for American exceptionalism driving Hispanics from Democrats: Latina congresswoman”—
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/latina-congresswoman-says-hispanics-fleeing-democrats-because-liberals
“Appeals court temporarily halts Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan”—
https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/appeals-court-temporarily-halts-bidens-student-loan-forgiveness-plan
Note, however, in the interests of fairness and balance…
“Biden doubles down on his economic policies, ‘I think we’re going to do just fine’ “—
https://justthenews.com/government/white-house/biden-claims-mega-maga-trickle-down-policies-will-drive-voters-dems-midterms
“Border Protection announces woman-focused ‘diversity, equity and inclusion’ recruitment drive”—
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/border-protection-announces-woman-focused-diversity-equity-and
WRT that NYS race for governor:
https://instapundit.com/549604/
Key grafs:
‘…Plus: “The Quinnipiac poll ranked crime as the top issue among voters — above protecting democracy.”
‘That’s because voters realize that “protecting democracy” is just a slogan for “keeping Democrats in power,” and that Democrats in power are what led to the problems with crime and the economy….’
“The principle is that there are noble challenges (which are challenges that claim exclusion and particularly racial exclusion) and there are base challenges (challenges that claim cheating and over-inclusion, particularly cheating on the part of people of color in big cities such as Atlanta or Philadelphia and therefore are racist challenges).” neo
“Man is not a rational animal; he is a rationalizing animal.” Robert A. Heinlein
I had the opportunity to talk to a long time friend of mine today, we’ve known each other for 35 years. His views are very leftist, but unlike others he is still my friend. He said that the (generalized) Left believes that J6 was an actual coup d’etat that could work. I kept asking HOW it would work and he really couldn’t say. He mentioned new electors, right wing judges and so on. Frankly I was amazed at how little faith he in our institutions, our government. He also seemed to believe that a judge’s politics determined how they would adjudicate, ignoring the law.
he must have heard of the kill chain expose on hbo, as well as the frontline expose on dominion, were they practicing ‘election denial’ actually most judges including carl nichols, proved blind to facts and justice, I forget who sentenced the 69 year old granny with cancer, for selfies in the capital
the problem is hyperinflation is bad, but so are the other alternatives, if we don’t do a, we still have 31 trillion in debt, and rising, and we choke the economy in the tub, to boot, (not my insight, a fellow iconoclast brian b, brought it up)
it was of course in 2000, when the dems first decided, ‘heads they win, tails you lose’ so they said, electronic voter machines was the answer, then 2004, they said no not those, then it was fine in 2006 and 2008, for reason, then koch bros! in 2010, then fine again in 2012, because superior tech skills, then squirrel in 2016,
JFM on October 22, 2022 at 7:05 pm said: “He also seemed to believe that a judge’s politics determined how they would adjudicate, ignoring the law.”
Well, he was right about that.
I had the opportunity to talk to a long time friend of mine today, we’ve known each other for 35 years. His views are very leftist, but unlike others he is still my friend. He said that the (generalized) Left believes that J6 was an actual coup d’etat that could work. I kept asking HOW it would work and he really couldn’t say.
JFM:
Thanks for this.
I have my stories about leftist friends (as well as my past self). I readily concede we were/are wrong on many counts.
However, I hold that, on the whole, we are just human beings, doing our imperfect human being’s best.
The current Cold Civil War will, hopefully, never go Hot. Even so, the Red and Blue will have to make it up like the Blue and Gray after Civil War I.
the (generalized) Left believes that J6 was an actual coup d’etat that could work.
In the history of coups, I don’t recall the ones trying to carry it off to be the ones claiming it would have never worked.
Then again, I do think a coup d’etat happened on January 6, 2021, when Nancy Pelosi called the JCS and told them not to follow orders from the then Commander in Chief. That is the very definition of a coup. Republicans should have pounced on that call, but instead, they threw in the towel.
Long story short:
These are sheep and/or useful idiots and/or beneficiaries of the corrupt bureaucracies
Speaking of denial, a Mr George White poses a question that the entire country should address.
Sane people want to know how is it possible for such an abomination to occupy the highest office in the land?
I could put this up on the Hiding and Avoiding post also, as it encompasses the entirety of the Democrat playbook.
https://pjmedia.com/columns/kevindowneyjr/2022/10/22/trumps-greatest-achievement-that-no-one-is-talking-about-flushing-out-the-swamp-commies-n1639120
Nothing in there that regular Neo readers don’t already know, but sometimes it’s good to have a pep rally for the team.
“Frankly I was amazed at how little faith he [has] in our institutions, our government.”
Well, he must have OBVIOUSLY KNOWN—deep down, instinctively, intuitively—that the 2020 election was STOLEN(!!!)….
I can’t excuse the hypocrisy of the left anymore as anything less than pure evil. I know, neo, you don’t want to write people off as incorrigible. I do. If they think J6 was an assault on “our democracy” (whatever that is; Article 4 section 4 says we’re a Republic) because Trump supporters attempted to stop a “duly elected” president from taking office then what are we to make of Jan 20 2017 when a violent mob of leftists did exactly the same thing to stop the Trump inauguration?
https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/19/politics/trump-inauguration-protests-womens-march/index.html
“Washington
CNN
—
Six police officers were injured and 217 protesters arrested Friday after a morning of peaceful protests and coordinated disruptions of Donald Trump’s inauguration ceremony gave way to ugly street clashes in downtown Washington.
At least two DC police officers and one other person were taken to the hospital after run-ins with protesters, DC Fire Spokesman Vito Maggiolo told CNN. Acting DC Police Chief Peter Newsham said the officers’ injuries were considered minor and not life threatening.
Bursts of chaos erupted on 12th and K streets as black-clad “antifascist” protesters smashed storefronts and bus stops…”
Seriously, how pig ignorant can the people you’re talking about be? And I apologize to pigs for comparing them to leftists who absolve themselves of their obvious guilt by claiming it’s different when they do it.
I hunt hawgs here in Texas. If I piss one or a whole sounder off and they take offense they are welcome to take me on. And a big boar or a bunch of feral hawgs are equipped to do the job.
It’s an honest relationship. Unlike anything I’ve ever have had or could possibly have with the MFM or leftists
P.S. The whole point of hunting dangerous game is knowing they can turn the tables on you.
I have glimpsed a lot of Democratic campaigning/messaging that other side’s candidate is a “election denier!!” That the right is dangerously swayed by “election deniers!” “Election deniers,” are up there with “vaccine deniers” and “Holocaust deniers” as evil and dangerous, the bottle of the moral barrel, holding views that would land them in jail in a fair world.
I think Neo’s analysis of why they think their objections are different is very astute. However, I’d argue that there is a lot of very conscious “fortifying” the next election going on, to intimidate Republican candidates from contesting even the most suspect results.
Except there is no evidence to support any large scale fraud in the election process.
Zachriel … the compromises in the election processes – junk-mail voting, hasty changes in election rules, and irregular activity in counting the votes; perpetrated by judges, governors and other unauthorized parties in haste in a crisis-not-to-waste – tainted the election as much as bad police procedure taints courtroom evidence that leads to its exclusion … and the government, as opposed to its individual operatives, does not qualify for the presumption of innocence, because it holds the authority to coercively enforce its decisions.
The compromises are all the evidence that is needed, that this election can’t be trusted and should have been sent to the House per the Constitution to vote in a President, not merely certify a compromised election. Of course, that would have led to Trump winning a second term, and they couldn’t validate 75 million deplorable people like that.
And it is reinforced by the courts ducking their duty to adjudicate the process on technicalities.
It is the job of government to prove that this election was on the up-and-up. Our officials – not their critics – have the burden of proof here. And “because we say so” is not sufficient.
“ It is the job of government to prove that this election was on the up-and-up. Our officials – not their critics – have the burden of proof here. And “because we say so” is not sufficient.”
This! A thousand times, this!
}}} For very many Democrats, the riots in 2017 at the Trump inauguration are either quite literally forgotten, or are considered mere demonstrations of the ordinary sort.
An excellent piece, Neo, but here, even you forget the far far more visible behavior of the Democrats during the Kavanaugh hearings. They were running roughshod all over Congress, haranguing congessbozos in elevators, and in general, acting insane. Contrast THAT with what the 1/6 people did and how THEY behaved, and you see a sharp dichotomy in what liberals are allowed, if not encouraged, to do, and what conservatives are imprisoned for…
Jester Naybor: It is the job of government to prove that this election was on the up-and-up.
While states vary considerably in their procedures, all states have systems in place to ensure ballot integrity. For instance, absentee ballots typically have barcodes, counting is done in front of observers, and audits of the procedures are routinely conducted. For instance, in Georgia, under the oversight of a Republican secretary of state, the state audited the count, did a complete hand recount of all the ballots, then even audited signature matching.
Furthermore, rules were subject to court review *before* the election, and compliance with the rules was subject to court review *after* the election.
With all this, there was never any evidence of significant fraud.
—
Trump v. Pennsylvania: “Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”
https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203371np.pdf
With all this, there was never any evidence of significant fraud.
They’re really not getting their money’s worth with you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVgbFttx-6I
Zachriel,
Again, repeating lies relentlessly won’t make them true. You are lying. You know you are lying. We know you are lying. You support liars. You repeat the lies of the liars you support.
You have no credibility. None. It might be tempting to ask: “have you no decency?!” But we all know the answer. If you had any decency, you wouldn’t be supporting those who gave up any pretense of decency decades ago.
Zachriel, you don’t get it.
Government has to satisfy the people with the burden of proof, not the other way around.
And some procedures are more reliable than others. Junk-mail ballot distribution is a far cry from the absentee ballots you describe. Covering windows, leaky water pipes, and stopping counting on a whim is not assuring adequate oversight.
And procedures are to be approved by STATE LEGISLATURES, BEFORE-THE-FACT – not changed by judges and election officials in haste, in the name of panic-demic.
Why is this all so important? Because once bad ballots get into the count, it is much harder to find them and much easier for fraudsters to get their way. Audits are not foolproof, especially when some of the auditors are inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to one party over another. Not even signature matching is foolproof, if the original signatures are stored as images by election officials and fraudsters can gain access to them to print them on fake ballots.
Process matters. Your faction ignored that. Had they adhered to established-as-reliable election procedures, they would have met their burden of proof.
They did not. Instead, they compromised those procedures in a manner reminiscent of allowing ATM access to our bank accounts without a PIN, in the name of “convenience”.
They made this mess. Not their critics, including President Trump.
And as a result, your man is a Pseudodent.
Jester Naybor: Junk-mail ballot distribution is a far cry from the absentee ballots you describe.
It’s not as if you can make photocopies then stuff them in the ballot box. It doesn’t work that way. In Wisconsin, for instance, outgoing ballots have intelligent mail barcodes to detect abnormalities in delivery. Each ballot is then tracked and has a paper trail. If you were to create a fake ballot, it would be detected and lead to an investigation.
Jester Naybor: Covering windows
Opening of absentee ballots cannot be observed by the general public or allowed to be photographed; otherwise, you could determine how individual people voted.
Jester Naybor: And procedures are to be approved by STATE LEGISLATURES, BEFORE-THE-FACT – not changed by judges and election officials in haste, in the name of panic-demic.
Most state legislatures have given significant discretion to election officials. But if election officials exceed their authority, the campaigns can take the issue to court before the election. It’s part of the process.
Jester Naybor: Process matters.
Of course, which is why we repeatedly pointed to the process.
“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption. . . That has not happened.”
It’s not as if you can make photocopies then stuff them in the ballot box. It doesn’t work that way. In Wisconsin, for instance, outgoing ballots have intelligent mail barcodes to detect abnormalities in delivery. Each ballot is then tracked and has a paper trail. If you were to create a fake ballot, it would be detected and lead to an investigation.
And there goes the confidentiality of the ballot you are saying it was necessary to “protect” by covering windows during tabulation, shooting a hole in your second argument.
And the ability of someone with access to voter-registration info – including signature images – and the “secret sauce” of those barcodes, makes forgery possible with some effort. All it takes is enough of these “votes” from people who don’t show up on Election Day – without a cross-check on who didn’t vote – and you can change the results of the election, complete with the cover of ballots with names of registered voters.
That’s less secure than handing an in-person vote an anonymized ballot – or a notarized absentee ballot returned by trackable means like registered mail or FedEx – where the ballot is submitted securely one-by-one into the custody of election officials.
But at least your state doesn’t mass-mail out ballots. But you do allow ballot harvesting by third parties, which is also a threat to the chain-of-custody.
Now, fulfill your burden of proof, and tell me CONCLUSIVELY how each state in this article effectively protects that chain of custody – and complied with the CONSTITUTIONAL requirement that STATE LEGISLATURES define voting rules … not judges, not election officials, not after-the-fact. Pay particular attention to PA and NV … AZ also was a hot mess in 2020 as well from the looks of post-election investigations that the Powers That Be there continue to ignore, even though they looked as secure as WI.
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/mail-ballots-trump-nevada-arizona/2020/12/06/id/1000299/
“Because we say so” or dismissal on technicalities does not count. Neither does your selective assertions to date.
The burden of proof, is yours and the election officials you trust.
Jester Naybor: And there goes the confidentiality of the ballot you are saying it was necessary to “protect” by covering windows during tabulation, shooting a hole in your second argument.
You don’t seem to have idea how any of this works. Only election workers and official observers, who have been trained and agree to maintain the secret ballot, are allowed to handle ballots, including absentee ballots.
Jester Naybor: And the ability of someone with access to voter-registration info – including signature images – and the “secret sauce” of those barcodes, makes forgery possible with some effort.
There would be multiple problems with such a scheme. There would be no record of the delivery of such ballots, and it would likely result in a large number of duplicate ballots. There is no evidence of this.
Jester Naybor: https://www.newsmax.com/politics/mail-ballots-trump-nevada-arizona/2020/12/06/id/1000299/
From your link (October 25, 2020): “Now, Trump campaign lawyers have primarily concentrated their efforts on six states”
None of those efforts ever demonstrated evidence of significant fraud. For instance, the article claims there was a problem with signature matching in Georgia; however, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation oversaw an audit of signatures, and found no noteworthy discrepancies.
Only election workers and official observers, who have been trained and agree to maintain the secret ballot, are allowed to handle ballots, including absentee ballots.
You are way too trusting … or complicit. They need oversight – not blind trust.
Proactive proof that they did their jobs right, is required of those who have the monopoly on the use of coercive force. They do not get a presumption of innocence.
That means every discrepancy is addressed that could compromise the integrity of votes and their tabulation, accounting for every avenue of potential fraud and how they closed those avenues.
Is that an impossible standard to meet? In the name of panic-demic and “racism” several states opened the door to breaks in the chain-of-custody, shifted deadlines, and played fast-and-loose with tabulation procedures that likely made it impossible to meet that standard.
Those you trust, made this mess.
The election should have been thrown into the House … but that would have meant Trump winning, and self-righteous socialists like you just couldn’t have him getting in the way of your Utopian neo-feudalism,
How many of thess elecfion workers were zuck employees why did they kick the observers out why did they block them in philadelphia why did they make the practices unreviewable and proscribe discussion why are they prosecuting alternate ballot slates fore knowledge of a crime
Jester Naybor: They need oversight – not blind trust.
Of course there’s oversight. That’s part of the process. For instance, in Georgia, oversight was provided by a Republican secretary of state under laws enacted by a Republican legislature, and he was overseen by the courts, state and federal. Nothing is new about any of this. ETA: If there’s a weak link, it’s having a partisan in charge of the election process. But he was a Republican with a vested interest in Republicans winning the election.
Jester Naybor: That means every discrepancy is addressed
Discrepancies have been addressed. You even inadvertantly point it out yourself with your previous link, where multiple allegations were made, then found lacking merit.
miguel cervantes: why did they kick the observers out why did they block them in philadelphia
There were too many observers per the rules. At no time were there no observers from both parties.
miguel cervantes: why did they make the practices unreviewable
Rules are reviewable *before* the election. Whether those rules were followed is reviewable *after* the election. More particularly, multiple investigations and court cases found no evidence of any significant irregularity that could have affected the result.
“there is no clear evidence of massive absentee-ballot fraud or forgery. On the contrary, at oral argument in the District Court, the Campaign specifically disavowed any claim of fraud.”
Zachriel:
Your argument is a red herring. No clear evidence in a court of law is possible ex post facto, when the rules have been changed to enable fraud and make it impossible to trace it, especially through a huge increase in ballots by mail that are untraceable once removed from their envelopes. I have detailed this and many other problems in many many posts here, such as this, this, this, and this, as well as many many more. Here’s a post that describes how Great Britain handles voting integrity in the case of mail-in ballots; it’s a very different and far more secure system.
I put those links here – not for you, because you are here to troll – but for others who are interested in learning why fraud was highly possible but cannot be proven.
}}} Jester Naybor: Covering windows
Opening of absentee ballots cannot be observed by the general public or allowed to be photographed; otherwise, you could determine how individual people voted.
Sure they can. The actual face of the ballots should not be visible, but the ACTIVITY of the process CAN be videotaped, making things like pulling unaccounted for boxes into the process.
Moreover, you claim that watchers were present at all times, but this is an overt lie and anyone paying attention knows this. In multiple cases, the counting was “closed” and the watchers SENT HOME — only to be restarted an hour or more later… most conveniently in those regions where the numbers did not seem to add up.
}}} Rules are reviewable *before* the election.
Really? Then why were those challenging improprieties told they HAD to wait until AFTER the election was completed to bring challenges in court?
…Only to be told, once the election was over — in many, if not most cases — that now they were “too late” to challenge the improprieties…?
}}} Whether those rules were followed is reviewable *after* the election.
Not when the claim is made and the court supports that those making challenges “don’t have standing”, which was the case with something akin to 95% of the cases brought before the courts.
I’m sorry, if the actual STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL don’t have “standing” to challenge improprieties in another state’s OPEN VIOLATION OF THEIR OWN PROCESSES — ON BEHALF of their own residents, WHO THE FUCK DOES?
No, you do not have to be a resident of a state to challenge a state failing to follow its own legally defined processes, it is clear that any serious improprieties — and there were FUCKING MANY OPENLY DOCUMENTED — that could result in a substantial alteration of a single state’s final results — affects EVERY SINGLE FRANCHISEE IN THIS COUNTRY.
Q.E.D. —
You’re either an ignorant parrot or a lying charlatan. Or both.
My money is on BOTH.
Moreover, many of the numbers just flat out did not make sense.
Precincts that went for Trump in 2016, and had INCREASED the percentage of GOP in them — magically went for Biden?
Seriously? On a routine basis?
“Bellweather” counties who had reliably predicted winners for decades magically FAILED this time?
Trump got MORE VOTES than ANY CANDIDATE IN this nation’s HISTORY…
And lost to someone who barely even CAMPAIGNED successfully — he had few rallies and his rallies could be counted accurately by senile old JOE HIMSELF… Yet by some magical means he managed to get 10 MILLION more votes than Trump’s RECORD TALLY?
No. FUCK YOU, NO. That dog don’t hunt. Given all the improprieties which occurred, given all the failures in key states to FOLLOW THEIR OWN LEGAL PROCESSES, No one in their right mind should have accepted that result. Anyone who did was IDIOT or an unprincipled partisan HACK.
Then, to top it off, they fucking BRAGGED about what they did:
https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/