Yes, voter fraud is VERY real. Here are some of the MANY cases, with documentation

[Ikari]

I agree that mail voting is not cheating. However, it is difficult to monitor.

In many elections mail ballots are never even counted because the total is less than the margin of victory. If that is going to change, then significant safeguards are necessary and none have been proposed. much less implemented.

It's quite easy to monitor, which is why Colorado has the best voting system of all 50 States.

 

[Jay59]

It's quite easy to monitor, which is why Colorado has the best voting system of all 50 States.

It is quite difficult to monitor. Making sure a person who votes by mail cannot also vote in person is an issue. Making sure that exactly ballot is sent to an eligible voter, that the person receives it, that any vote cast is cast be the person the ballot was intended for, that all of the ballots are cast in a timely manner, that all the ballots are counted. None of these points are easy to monitor, especially when there is rarely accurate voter registration, due to deaths and relocations.

It's quite difficult. Any official claiming it is easy is either lying or ignorant.

 

[Ikari]

It is quite difficult to monitor. Making sure a person who votes by mail cannot also vote in person is an issue. Making sure that exactly ballot is sent to an eligible voter, that the person receives it, that any vote cast is cast be the person the ballot was intended for, that all of the ballots are cast in a timely manner, that all the ballots are counted. None of these points are easy to monitor, especially when there is rarely accurate voter registration, due to deaths and relocations.

It's quite difficult. Any official claiming it is easy is either lying or ignorant.

It's actually not that hard at all, Colorado manages just fine.

Anyone claiming "it's quite difficult" is either lying or ignorant of the system.

 

[JasperL]

I agree that mail voting is not cheating. However, it is difficult to monitor.

In many elections mail ballots are never even counted because the total is less than the margin of victory. If that is going to change, then significant safeguards are necessary and none have been proposed. much less implemented.

The idea that there are no "safeguards" in place or proposed is ignorant and wrong. Many safeguards were already in place for the typical mail in voter pre-covid, because mail in ballots are OFTEN in fact counted. As for specifics, I can follow my ballot, see when it was received, counted. Almost all or all states have the same feature. So there's an electronic record accessible by me and election people and the public that tells everyone that I requested a ballot, then that it was mailed, and then received.

 

[Razoo]

There's no justifiable reason for mass mail in ballots, and even Dr Faucci and others have stated thats the case, while approving standard, in person voting. Plus, there are many proven cases of mail in voter fraud, mostly involving democrats, many of which involved the cheaters winning office, then later being thrown out of office and successfully prosecuted!

Voter Fraud Is Real—Here's How Democrats Want to Steal the 2020 Election | Opinion

Fifteen Election Results That Were Thrown Out Because of Fraudulent Mail-In Ballots - Tennessee Star

Newt Gingrich s the Newsweek source. No doubt Newt has more lies on the books than Trump..........another worthless human being.

 

[Jay59]

The idea that there are no "safeguards" in place or proposed is ignorant and wrong. Many safeguards were already in place for the typical mail in voter pre-covid, because mail in ballots are OFTEN in fact counted. As for specifics, I can follow my ballot, see when it was received, counted. Almost all or all states have the same feature. So there's an electronic record accessible by me and election people and the public that tells everyone that I requested a ballot, then that it was mailed, and then received.

Be serious. There are not even accurate voter rolls. I have done canvasing. I know how fast list get out of date.

That's just the first serious issue. Next, you have to deal with identification. Did John Doe really submit John Doe's ballot, or was it John Smith or Dosey Doe? Getting the submission date is critical, which exposes you to lost ballots due to Post Office inefficiency.

On a small scale, these problems exist, but are frequently negligible. Increasing the scale increases the problem and adds peak load issues on top of them.

Newt Gingrich s the Newsweek source. No doubt Newt has more lies on the books than Trump..........another worthless human being.

That does not make the facts not facts. Newt has many faults, but alternate facts is not among them.

 

[veritas1]

Wherever the most fraud can be managed, that is what the Democrats support. Their only hope against Trump is to so massively manipulate the mail in vote that they can steal a few key swing states. That is all this is about. Everyone knows it, Democrats especially.

 

[veritas1]

Be serious. There are not even accurate voter rolls. I have done canvasing. I know how fast list get out of date.

That's just the first serious issue. Next, you have to deal with identification. Did John Doe really submit John Doe's ballot, or was it John Smith or Dosey Doe? Getting the submission date is critical, which exposes you to lost ballots due to Post Office inefficiency.

On a small scale, these problems exist, but are frequently negligible. Increasing the scale increases the problem and adds peak load issues on top of them.


That does not make the facts not facts. Newt has many faults, but alternate facts is not among them.

Anybody who thinks that mail in voting isn't fraught with inefficiency, fraud and all sorts of other problems is either willfully stupid or simply dishonest. Its track record is terrible, even on a small scale. There is nothing better designed to cause chaos this year than mass mail in voting and that is exactly why Democrats want it.

 

[Jay59]

Anybody who thinks that mail in voting isn't fraught with inefficiency, fraud and all sorts of other problems is either willfully stupid

You just described Adam Schiff and Jeff Zucker.

or simply dishonest.

and Nancy Pelosi

Its track record is terrible, even on a small scale. There is nothing better designed to cause chaos this year than mass mail in voting and that is exactly why Democrats want it.

On a small scale, you can ignore most of the problems, since it rarely matters. Instead, they want to expand the D in biology to a D average on the transcript and call it good.

 

[JasperL]

Be serious. There are not even accurate voter rolls. I have done canvasing. I know how fast list get out of date.

That's just the first serious issue. Next, you have to deal with identification. Did John Doe really submit John Doe's ballot, or was it John Smith or Dosey Doe? Getting the submission date is critical, which exposes you to lost ballots due to Post Office inefficiency.

Well, in my case the registered voter JasperL, who lives at 123 Main, requested a ballot, it was sent to the address of registered voter JasperL, 123 Main, signed by me, JasperL, which they can compare to my signature on file, and it was received by the elections office about 9 days prior to the election, so in plenty of time.

And comparing signatures is how the bank will decide whether or not to cash that 5 figure check we wrote for property taxes on a commercial property last week. Seems like that's good enough for a ballot.

That does not make the facts not facts. Newt has many faults, but alternate facts is not among them.

Quote me a single fact in that article by Newt that demonstrated mail in voting is how Democrats plan to, and I quote, "steal" the election. Just one "fact."

 

[JasperL]

Anybody who thinks that mail in voting isn't fraught with inefficiency, fraud and all sorts of other problems is either willfully stupid or simply dishonest. Its track record is terrible, even on a small scale. There is nothing better designed to cause chaos this year than mass mail in voting and that is exactly why Democrats want it.

How does "chaos" benefit Democrats specifically? Most states are run by Republicans, Democrats need to win some of those states to win the elections, and deliberate 'chaos' helps Democrats achieve that goal by what mechanism?

 

[veritas1]

How does "chaos" benefit Democrats specifically? Most states are run by Republicans, Democrats need to win some of those states to win the elections, and deliberate 'chaos' helps Democrats achieve that goal by what mechanism?

Simple. By endless lawsuits and contesting of results and phony recounts and "found" ballots. Look at the election where Franken beat Norm Coleman. That was the exact game plan that was used. Also, the states where this needs to take place are OH, PA, WI, MI, MN, GA , NC & FL. 4 have Dem governors and 4 have GOP governors. If the Dems can swipe PA, MI, WI and MN, they will win. If they can filch a GOP state, even better.

 

[OscarLevant]

There's no justifiable reason for mass mail in ballots, and even Dr Faucci and others have stated thats the case, while approving standard, in person voting. Plus, there are many proven cases of mail in voter fraud, mostly involving democrats, many of which involved the cheaters winning office, then later being thrown out of office and successfully prosecuted!

Voter Fraud Is Real—Here's How Democrats Want to Steal the 2020 Election | Opinion

Fifteen Election Results That Were Thrown Out Because of Fraudulent Mail-In Ballots - Tennessee Star

The issue was never 'fraud didn't exist' the issue is fraud isn't widespread to any degree sufficient to impact a national election.

I've seen crap that the heritage foundation has offered up, but it doesn't amount to squat, really, when we are talking about 165 million votes cast.


But, if you really want to understand how the right steals elections, watch the film, 'rigged' , which is fully documented with testimonies of republican operatives.

but, of course, you won't.

And, Republicans, via the 29 red states who partnered with Kris Kobach's "interstate crosscheck', which disproportionately affected mostly blacks, adding up to 1.1 million voters purged, whereby in the swing states, the purged count vastly exceeded Trump's margins of victory in those states, stole the 2016 election. And though Greg Palast, an investigative reported was cited as the main reason a federal judge has blocked crosscheck from being used, it's only temporary and repubs are trying to revive it.


Indiana: ACLU, citing Palast, stops Crosscheck

 

[JasperL]

Wherever the most fraud can be managed, that is what the Democrats support. Their only hope against Trump is to so massively manipulate the mail in vote that they can steal a few key swing states. That is all this is about. Everyone knows it, Democrats especially.

That looks suspiciously like made up bull****. Any facts you can cite to back that up?

And our only "hope" at this point are big national leads in the polls and leads in several key 'swing' states. Seems to be a more productive avenue is to get out our voters, and win at the polls, versus try to "manipulate" the mail in vote somehow, other than LOTS of people voting by mail. I'm sure that's a big part of the plan - "manipulate" the voting by making sure millions and millions and millions of us VOTE, period, by mail, in person. That's the goal.

 

[veritas1]

That looks suspiciously like made up bull****. Any facts you can cite to back that up?

And our only "hope" at this point are big national leads in the polls and leads in several key 'swing' states. Seems to be a more productive avenue is to get out our voters, and win at the polls, versus try to "manipulate" the mail in vote somehow, other than LOTS of people voting by mail. I'm sure that's a big part of the plan - "manipulate" the voting by making sure millions and millions and millions of us VOTE, period, by mail, in person. That's the goal.

Mail in voting is subject to fraud and manipulation. I wonder how many 11th hour "lost" mail in votes will appear in some swing state Trump is winning. If the left is so confident that they've made their case against Trump then they should get their asses out to the polls. We dare you to try and win without mass mail in voting.

 

[Rawley]

OK, I take a drug that intentionally depresses my immune system. Should I vote in person or by mail, and who should decide that? What if I care for my 90 year old mother in law? Mail or in person? What if I just visit once per week? Mail or in person? The Democrats' proposal is that I can decide, vote in person OR by mail, and not have to offer a reason. Why is that a problem with you? You have the same choice.

FWIW, it's SAD!!! how big a pathetic, dishonest, shameless hack Gingrich has become. That article was an embarrassment, or should have been. He doesn't like mail in voting, because it will help Democrats. Higher turnout always does. So he alleges Democrats want to "steal" the 2020 election but offers NOTHING to support that bull****.

He's appealing to the idiot, ignorant contingent of the GOP. This crap is exactly why the GOP needs to be burned to the ground and the remains sown with salt. It's shameful behavior from someone who's supposed to be a credible voice for the GOP, but he's not even unusual for the GOP in this era.

And you're OK with sending out five million ballots that my state knows are facially invalid. No opportunity for fraud there, right?

 

[Jay59]

Well, in my case the registered voter JasperL, who lives at 123 Main, requested a ballot, it was sent to the address of registered voter JasperL, 123 Main, signed by me, JasperL, which they can compare to my signature on file, and it was received by the elections office about 9 days prior to the election, so in plenty of time.

Your method removes a great many issues. It certifies the location, the person and provides advance notice to determine if you are an eligible voter and to notify the live voting sites that you are voting by mail. However, the concept of sending ballots only on request has been thoroughly quashed by vote by mail advocates.

And comparing signatures is how the bank will decide whether or not to cash that 5 figure check we wrote for property taxes on a commercial property last week. Seems like that's good enough for a ballot.

The bank has your signature on file. The voting authority most likely does not. The bank will also require a picture ID in person.

Quote me a single fact in that article by Newt that demonstrated mail in voting is how Democrats plan to, and I quote, "steal" the election. Just one "fact."

Be serious. The existence of the Election Law Reform Initiative is a fact. I don't doubt that there is also a database of cases. Bear in mind that Newt's chosen method is a flood of facts. His conclusions are not as closely tied to the facts as he would have you believe, but the facts are still facts.

 

[JasperL]

Simple. By endless lawsuits and contesting of results and phony recounts and "found" ballots. Look at the election where Franken beat Norm Coleman. That was the exact game plan that was used.

Franken got more votes. That is the game plan! GUILTY!!!

Also, the states where this needs to take place are OH, PA, WI, MI, MN, GA , NC & FL. 4 have Dem governors and 4 have GOP governors. If the Dems can swipe PA, MI, WI and MN, they will win. If they can filch a GOP state, even better.

Yes, that worked so well in Florida that one time. Oh, right, Bush won the election.

And you're saying "filch" as if that's a plan. It's not. It's made up bull****.

Why can't we call any election not won by guys you like to "filch" it. Let's not "filch" it in a mysterious, unknown, un-described way with mail in votes, but by voting in person!! Busses maybe? Give all the homeless a voter registration card?!! Who knows!!?

 

[JasperL]

Your method removes a great many issues. It certifies the location, the person and provides advance notice to determine if you are an eligible voter and to notify the live voting sites that you are voting by mail. However, the concept of sending ballots only on request has been thoroughly quashed by vote by mail advocates.

It hasn't been quashed. It's how the large majority of states are going to operate. Some states will send out the application to all registered voters, but they still have to send that request in to get a ballot. Last I saw, only 9 states were sending ballots to registered voters without a specific request from that voter, five of them have been doing it for years with no issues.

The bank has your signature on file. The voting authority most likely does not. The bank will also require a picture ID in person.

So does the election commission, and they verify signatures. And the bank doesn't require me to be there in person when the tax people deposit my check for 5 figures tomorrow. They'll draw against my account by 5 figures, based only on that signature.

Be serious. The existence of the Election Law Reform Initiative is a fact. I don't doubt that there is also a database of cases. Bear in mind that Newt's chosen method is a flood of facts. His conclusions are not as closely tied to the facts as he would have you believe, but the facts are still facts.

So the ELRI exists! WOW!!! I'm so impressed!!!

How does that "demonstrate mail in voting is how Democrats plan to, and I quote, "steal" the election."

 

[JasperL]

Mail in voting is subject to fraud and manipulation. I wonder how many 11th hour "lost" mail in votes will appear in some swing state Trump is winning. If the left is so confident that they've made their case against Trump then they should get their asses out to the polls. We dare you to try and win without mass mail in voting.

A mailed in vote is a legitimate vote. IDGAF what you "dare" us to do, except vote in big numbers, by mail and in person.

FWIW, I really, really REALLY hope the right wing idiots keep maligning mail in voting, because the must vulnerable are older voters, and they tend to vote Republican. You're digging a hole for them, and I am loving every stupid, dishonest story talking about how fraudulent the same method of voting Trump uses is to the regular people.

 

[Jay59]

It hasn't been quashed. It's how the large majority of states are going to operate.

This does not appear to be the case. Some states, but not a majority.

Some states will send out the application to all registered voters, but they still have to send that request in to get a ballot.

Which is a substantial improvement

Last I saw, only 9 states were sending ballots to registered voters without a specific request from that voter, five of them have been doing it for years with no issues.

This is still a legitimate concern

So does the election commission, and they verify signatures. And the bank doesn't require me to be there in person when the tax people deposit my check for 5 figures tomorrow. They'll draw against my account by 5 figures, based only on that signature.

I'll go 50/50 on this one. There are issues, but it's better than some states. California, for example, does not make me feel confident in election integrity.

So the ELRI exists! WOW!!! I'm so impressed!!!

You asked for one fact and got the first one I saw. Next time ask for what you really want.

How does that "demonstrate mail in voting is how Democrats plan to, and I quote, "steal" the election."

You're talking to the wrong poster on this one. As I said, suspicious things occurred in California, but suspicion is all I have.

 

[JasperL]

And you're OK with sending out five million ballots that my state knows are facially invalid. No opportunity for fraud there, right?

If you have evidence of mail in voting fraud, show it to us.

 

[JasperL]

This does not appear to be the case. Some states, but not a majority.

Which is a substantial improvement

This is still a legitimate concern

I don't know what you're disputing. Nine states will send out ballots. The other 41 require voters to request a ballot. 41/50 is a large majority - it's 82% of states.

Where Americans Can Vote by Mail in the 2020 Elections - The New York Times

I'll go 50/50 on this one. There are issues, but it's better than some states. California, for example, does not make me feel confident in election integrity.

What issues?

You asked for one fact and got the first one I saw. Next time ask for what you really want.

I asked this question: "Quote me a single fact in that article by Newt that demonstrated mail in voting is how Democrats plan to, and I quote, "steal" the election. Just one "fact."

The existence of an organization does NOT demonstrate that Democrats are planning to steal an election. I thought you might want to debate this honestly - guess not....

 

[Jay59]

I don't know what you're disputing. Nine states will send out ballots. The other 41 require voters to request a ballot. 41/50 is a large majority - it's 82% of states. Where Americans Can Vote by Mail in the 2020 Elections - The New York Times

Every state has long had rules whereby a mail ballot can be requested. That is not what is under discussion.

What issues?

One county where a judge ruled a million people needed to be removed from active roles, for example.

I asked this question: "Quote me a single fact in that article by Newt that demonstrated mail in voting is how Democrats plan to, and I quote, "steal" the election. Just one "fact."

And you got your fact from the article.

The existence of an organization does NOT demonstrate that Democrats are planning to steal an election. I thought you might want to debate this honestly - guess not....

No one ever said it did.

If you want Newt's logic read the article. Facts he will have. Logic, meh.

 

[JasperL]

Every state has long had rules whereby a mail ballot can be requested. That is not what is under discussion.

You: "However, the concept of sending ballots only on request has been thoroughly quashed by vote by mail advocates."

Me: That's exactly what is required in 41/50 states.

You: Drivel ^^^

And you got your fact from the article.

No one ever said it did.

If you want Newt's logic read the article. Facts he will have. Logic, meh.

OK, I give up. You're moving goal posts, are trolling or lying, or just don't understand how to read simple English. If I ask for a 'fact' demonstrating Democrats are trying to "steal" the election, and you give me useless facts that show nothing, then pretend to be or are confused why I point that out, something is missing that makes honest debate impossible.