• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Amid Fraud Allegations, State Election Board Won't Certify North Carolina House Race

marke said:
If they are not US citizens then they should not be voting.
Click to expand...

but there are lots of folks, usually older citizens living in rural locales, who do not have a birth certificate
 
marke said:
If they are not US citizens then they should not be voting.
Click to expand...
1) There are almost no cases of non-citizens voting

2) Yet again! This case, which is one of the few voter fraud cases that is real, has NOTHING to do with non-citizens attempting to vote

3) Yet again! It is NOT justified to disenfranchise voters in order to "fix" a non-existent problem.

Would you be so willing to push a policy that took away your ability to vote?
 
upsideguy said:
If he won't, I will. There is no evidence of wholesale voter fraud perpetrated by Democrats. Actually, there evidence of wholesale voter fraud perpetrated by Republicans either.

All serious inquiries into voter fraud have been dead-ended investigations.

https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/voter-fraud
https://www.npr.org/2018/01/06/5761...on-established-to-solve-a-nonexistent-problem
The New Republican Myth of California Voter Fraud
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-billion-ballots-cast/?utm_term=.66dda1cc3a40
https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud


The allegations about voter fraud in NC are not about people voting at the voting booth, they deal with whether absentee ballots were compromised. Voter ID does not solve this "problem"

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article222362650.html
Click to expand...

If the difference between the candidates is under 1,000 votes, how wide-spread does the corruption in the election have to be before it qualifies as "wholesale"?
 
marke said:
My suggestions remain the same. Find a way to tag each ballot with a number and name that can be checked for verification. If voters are disenfranchised by that then let them be disenfranchised. If each ballot is tagged to a name and a number then it can be checked against national voter records for verification that it has nt been duplicated in any other precinct and that no false names or names of illegal voters are being used.
Click to expand...

Well, since that will effectively eliminate the secret ballot, why not go whole hog and conduct the whole election through a show of hands - to prevent multiple voting, each voter would have to show two hands. [If that results in the disenfranchisement of people who have had an arm amputated, well, that's a small price to pay - isn't it?]

The other potential solution would be to hold honest elections operated by non-political people whose primary mandate was to see that the highest number of potentially eligible voters were able to cast ballots in a safe and convenient manner.

THAT potential solution is, obviously, NOT going to be given any serious consideration by either the political party that currently controls the electoral process (and uses that control for its own benefit and to stay in power) in any given electoral district or the political party that hopes to be able to control the electoral process (so that it can use that control for its own benefit and to stay in power) in any given electoral district.
 
justabubba said:
but there are lots of folks, usually older citizens living in rural locales, who do not have a birth certificate
Click to expand...

Do they have no social security number? Do they not drive cars?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Well, since that will effectively eliminate the secret ballot, why not go whole hog and conduct the whole election through a show of hands - to prevent multiple voting, each voter would have to show two hands. [If that results in the disenfranchisement of people who have had an arm amputated, well, that's a small price to pay - isn't it?]

The other potential solution would be to hold honest elections operated by non-political people whose primary mandate was to see that the highest number of potentially eligible voters were able to cast ballots in a safe and convenient manner.

THAT potential solution is, obviously, NOT going to be given any serious consideration by either the political party that currently controls the electoral process (and uses that control for its own benefit and to stay in power) in any given electoral district or the political party that hopes to be able to control the electoral process (so that it can use that control for its own benefit and to stay in power) in any given electoral district.
Click to expand...

People register to vote. If that is not secret enough for them then they do not have to vote. But if they register they should prove they are authorized to vote in only one precinct.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
If the difference between the candidates is under 1,000 votes, how wide-spread does the corruption in the election have to be before it qualifies as "wholesale"?
Click to expand...

The election anomalies of the 9th district election appear to qualify as "wholesale fraud", which I define as a methodical defalcation that changed, or threatened to change, the outcome of a major election.

You caught me responding to a poster before I really understood this particular instance, which I admit appears to be "wholesale fraud That poster was trying to make the point that we have fraud and we should be all for voter ID. I was taking the position that we have never had wholesale fraud and that voter ID is not the answer to wholesale fraud (or this)...

To my understanding, this appears to be the biggest election fraud (see my definiton above) that have ever encountered. This is worrying. However, voter ID does nothing to address this issue.
 
marke said:
Do they have no social security number? Do they not drive cars?
Click to expand...

you do know that non-citizens are eligible to receive a social security number/card

they also drive cars
 
marke said:
My suggestions remain the same. Find a way to tag each ballot with a number and name that can be checked for verification. If voters are disenfranchised by that then let them be disenfranchised. If each ballot is tagged to a name and a number then it can be checked against national voter records for verification that it has nt been duplicated in any other precinct and that no false names or names of illegal voters are being used.
Click to expand...

That's basically already done. Tell us your name and some identifying information like your address and if not those on the forum, then anyone who buys the records can see when you voted for the past few elections. Campaigns buy this data and use it to target people in GOTV drives, they have your name, address, if you're registered with a party, then what party, and your voting history, in primaries and general elections. Your registration information has your name and a number - often some or all of your SSN.

The voting records don't and will never tag your BALLOT because that makes your vote public information, which is a no no.

This was ELECTION fraud, fraud by political insiders, who manipulated perhaps hundreds of votes. This is always the ACTUAL risk of a stolen or fraudulent election, because the payoff is bigger and it just takes a few people to change or affect hundreds of votes, thousands or 10s of thousands in the cases of voter roll purges using bad data (Florida in 2000 for example) or changes in voting rules, or just fraudulent counts using easily hacked machines.

And you're doing what is so common and using a case of ELECTION fraud by insiders to justify more restrictions on voters, when voters did nothing wrong here - the actual VOTERS were wronged by political insiders, their votes stolen, altered or discarded.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
I expect and this is personal opinion with no evidence to back it up

I believe the biggest source of voter fraud is from absentee ballots. It is the only way for a person or small group of people to create enough votes to actually have any actual result in the outcome of the election. Outside of ballot stuffing which in North America and Western Europe should be a hard thing to do.
Click to expand...

I know I'm a few days late here, but I'm going to nit pick. This is not a case of "voter" fraud but insider fraud, candidate fraud, campaign worker fraud, or generally election fraud. Voters did nothing wrong. We've unfortunately bought into GOP spin and now call all election fraud "voter" fraud, which is then used to implement rules that put further barriers on VOTERS.

Otherwise, I agree. When there are problems, they're almost always insiders doing shenanigans with absentee ballots of one kind or another. Once again, those types of fraud almost never involve fraud by the VOTERS but those handling their ballots in a corrupt way, like here. The place where any kind of fraud (other than perhaps with the count, and we haven't seen that very often) is least likely BY FAR, is AT THE POLLS. And of course that's where the focus has been lately, on nearly non-existent fraud at the polls.
 
marke said:
We should do everything we can to insure nobody is breaking voting laws.
Click to expand...

Yeah, like arrest and jail for a very long time the INSIDERS who corruptly handled legitimately cast ballots by the voters.
 
justabubba said:
Do you have a cite which documents your presentation
Click to expand...

Just Google Interstate Crosscheck System, and Kris Kobach and plagued by problems or fraudulent or probably "is a POS" and you'll get lots of hits. Here's one of many

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...to-take-it-nationwide/?utm_term=.2e9c3fff4922

A statistical analysis of the program published earlier this year by researchers at Stanford, Harvard, University of Pennsylvania and Microsoft, for instance, found that Crosscheck “would eliminate about 200 registrations used to cast legitimate votes for every one registration used to cast a double vote.”
Click to expand...

I can't speak to voters purged using the program, but essentially it's worthless. Which is why either the Ivy League educated Kris Kobach is in actuality a moron who designed and is pushing an absolutely terrible, error prone POS because he doesn't know better, OR he's a crook and the false positives are a feature, not a bug. I go with the latter interpretation. He's no idiot. He knows that minorities are far more likely to share names, and they are more likely Democrats, so purging them is a positive for the GOP.

That's why when Trump named him as chair of the voting commission, it was the old 'fox guarding the hen house' deal. There was no chance any election commission with him as the head would be anything but a farce and if we weren't lucky, a fraud.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
If the difference between the candidates is under 1,000 votes, how wide-spread does the corruption in the election have to be before it qualifies as "wholesale"?
Click to expand...

The actual numbers of known "voter" fraud you can count on one hand in almost every state in any given election. Most states you could do it with your ring finger alone, or no fingers because there are zero credible cases. There is no definition of "wholesale" that would include 1 or 2 possibly fraudulent votes out of 10s of thousands in a local election, millions for most statewide elections. That's the scale we're dealing with.
 
marke said:
People register to vote. If that is not secret enough for them then they do not have to vote. But if they register they should prove they are authorized to vote in only one precinct.
Click to expand...

Uh, that's the role of voter registration - registering successfully says, "I am a legal voter in this district for this election."

And if I try to register here in Tennessee, how can I possibly prove I'm not registered in any of the other 49 states?
 
markjs said:
Tell us again how it's the Democrats doing voter fraud?:roll:
Click to expand...

I recall stating that fraud happens on both sides of the isle. Not just any particular side.

I don't think the hold in certifying this win will really do much. Because the affidavit was just as flimsy as anything else that I've personally heard about accounts like this. Given how we live in an age of cellphone cameras, how someone could come up with no evidence on that line is beyond me.
 
Oborosen said:
I recall stating that fraud happens on both sides of the isle. Not just any particular side.

I don't think the hold in certifying this win will really do much. Because the affidavit was just as flimsy as anything else that I've personally heard about accounts like this. Given how we live in an age of cellphone cameras, how someone could come up with no evidence on that line is beyond me.
Click to expand...

You cannot have read much about this case to conclude that there is "no evidence."

Also here: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article222596020.html

An affidavit is evidence, and they have multiple affidavits. It's also evidence that they found at least 7 people who certified (signed as witness) to more than 10 votes. How does that happen unless they were paid to collect the ballots? And the campaigns who hired this guy suspiciously, election after election, get over 90% of the absentee ballots in this one little county. Amazing! And in this little county, far more people request and return absentee ballots. There are people admitting on camera to illegal activity (collecting the ballots and getting paid by the campaign - which is illegal) and voters who picked these vote harvesters out of a photo lineup.

And what's most telling is even vote fraudsters like Kris Kobach are going, "Hey this might be a problem!" and when guys like him are standing back, you know the problems are obvious, which they are.
 
Last edited:
JasperL said:
You cannot have read much about this case to conclude that there is "no evidence."

An affidavit is evidence, and they have multiple affidavits. It's also evidence that they found at least 7 people who certified (signed as witness) to more than 10 votes. How does that happen unless they were paid to collect the ballots? And the campaigns who hired this guy suspiciously, election after election, get over 90% of the absentee ballots in this one little county. Amazing! And in this little county, far more people request and return absentee ballots. There are people admitting on camera to illegal activity (collecting the ballots and getting paid by the campaign - which is illegal) and voters who picked these vote harvesters out of a photo lineup.

And what's most telling is even vote fraudsters like Kris Kobach are going, "Hey this might be a problem!" and when guys like him are standing back, you know the problems are obvious, which they are.
Click to expand...

Actually my "no evidence" claim, was about the affidavit mentioned in the article. Seeing as the woman could have gotten such a picture if she was so speculative about the person collecting her vote.
 
Oborosen said:
Actually my "no evidence" claim, was about the affidavit mentioned in the article. Seeing as the woman could have gotten such a picture if she was so speculative about the person collecting her vote.
Click to expand...

There are at least several affidavits. And demanding a photo or it's not real is an illegitimate standard. And the 'crime' attested to by the affidavits, plural, is that there were vote harvesters - non family collecting and returning votes. They have ample evidence of that with multiple people witnessing in some cases several DOZEN different absentee ballots. That isn't normal, and it supports with solid evidence what's alleged in the affidavits you don't accept. And there is at least one woman on camera admitting to the same crime, going door to door collecting ballots.

1) Affidavits
2) Individuals witnessing up to dozens of ballots
3) Woman on camera (at least) admitting to vote harvesting.

And if that's not enough, all the statistics related to absentee ballots in these counties are off the charts, several standard deviations from the norm, which fits the same pattern told by the affidavits, witnesses, etc. which fits the same likely fraudulent pattern whenever the main guy is involved, of in some cases huge spikes in the number of absentee ballots with 90%+ of absentee ballots going for the guy who hired him, and normal results in elections he's not active.

One of the big anomalies here is the number of requested and not returned ballots - double or triple the percentages in other races, which suggests the possibility at least of the vote harvesters returning ballots to the con man, and him tossing likely Democratic votes, which fits the pattern of huge percentages of black and Native American votes requested but not returned - percentages WAY outside the norms.

So all the evidence tells a consistent, fraudulent story. Might as well accept that election fraud happened and worry about how BIG the fraud was and whether it's enough to get another election.
 
Last edited:
JasperL said:
There are at least several affidavits. And demanding a photo or it's not real is an illegitimate standard. And the 'crime' attested to by the affidavits, plural, is that there were vote harvesters - non family collecting and returning votes. They have ample evidence of that with multiple people witnessing in some cases several DOZEN different absentee ballots. That isn't normal, and it supports with solid evidence what's alleged in the affidavits you don't accept. And there is at least one woman on camera admitting to the same crime, going door to door collecting ballots.

1) Affidavits
2) Individuals witnessing up to dozens of ballots
3) Woman on camera (at least) admitting to vote harvesting.

And if that's not enough, all the statistics related to absentee ballots in these counties are off the charts, several standard deviations from the norm, which fits the same pattern told by the affidavits, witnesses, etc. which fits the same likely fraudulent pattern whenever the main guy is involved, of in some cases huge spikes in the number of absentee ballots with 90%+ of absentee ballots going for the guy who hired him, and normal results in elections he's not active.

One of the big anomalies here is the number of requested and not returned ballots - double or triple the percentages in other races, which suggests the possibility at least of the vote harvesters returning ballots to the con man, and him tossing likely Democratic votes, which fits the pattern of huge percentages of black and Native American votes requested but not returned - percentages WAY outside the norms.

So all the evidence tells a consistent, fraudulent story. Might as well accept that election fraud happened and worry about how BIG the fraud was and whether it's enough to get another election.
Click to expand...

I'm not demanding anything at this point, because it still seems like a waste of time from my end. The amount of ballets don't even amount to a number that could sway the vote and even in this year, we've heard both houses call on each other for voter fraud at least once. It's starting to seem like one of those allegations that you just can't seem to shake, in light of someone just using because they can.

In retrospect, I'm just going to do what I originally intended and wait to see what happens. Which will most likely be nothing at this point, given the parties track record in this sort of thing. So I'm going to hold my breath for any kind of surprise.
 
marke said:
If voters are disenfranchised by that then let them be disenfranchised.
Click to expand...

That's what it all comes down to, in the end...let them be disenfranchised.
 
Oborosen said:
I'm not demanding anything at this point, because it still seems like a waste of time from my end. The amount of ballets don't even amount to a number that could sway the vote and even in this year, we've heard both houses call on each other for voter fraud at least once. It's starting to seem like one of those allegations that you just can't seem to shake, in light of someone just using because they can.

In retrospect, I'm just going to do what I originally intended and wait to see what happens. Which will most likely be nothing at this point, given the parties track record in this sort of thing. So I'm going to hold my breath for any kind of surprise.
Click to expand...

Ok, so both sides, although only in this case is there actual evidence.

FWIW, the number of votes is plenty, because of the many absentee ballots requested and not returned.... You are selectively ignoring evidence, and disregarding the large amount of evidence that's not really in doubt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom