Election Protection

MJDuncan1982

Member
Jun 29, 2004
506
26
16
Mississippi
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/election.observers.ap/index.html

I don't understand why so many people don't want observers in our elections. What are you trying to do?

This will HELP our democracy become better and more efficient. Just because it offends some sense of pride because we are America is ridiculous.

Just because we are America doesn't mean we are invinsible against fraud.
It seems to me that the country that thinks it's elections are perfect and doesn't need to watch them is the country most prone to tamper. It often times takes an outside opinion to recognize one's faults.

Barring an exercise that could help the nature of our democracy is absolutely ridiculous and contrary to what I believe in as an American!
 
the United States, require supervision of our elections? Unless you suspect more dead people in Cooke County, Illinois... (Chicago for the uninformed) will vote is this election than in 1960 when they put JFK over the top? No you libs want to attempt to steal another election... see Florida 2000 when Gore wanted recounts in selected Demo districts not statewide....
We require no supervision and no interference from other nations...Your suggestion otherwise is to relinquish U.S. soverignty to a third party.... No doubt perfectly acceptable to the internationalists like Kerry.. Let the UN monitor our elections and our use of the military------perfect-----NONSENSE!!!!
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: dmp
MJDuncan1982 said:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/election.observers.ap/index.html

I don't understand why so many people don't want observers in our elections. What are you trying to do?

This will HELP our democracy become better and more efficient. Just because it offends some sense of pride because we are America is ridiculous.

Just because we are America doesn't mean we are invinsible against fraud.
It seems to me that the country that thinks it's elections are perfect and doesn't need to watch them is the country most prone to tamper. It often times takes an outside opinion to recognize one's faults.

Barring an exercise that could help the nature of our democracy is absolutely ridiculous and contrary to what I believe in as an American!

Personally, I don't have a problem with observers for the elections, as long as they are truly impartial. My problem is with the reason this was even brought up to begin with.

After stretching the 2000 election out simply because they couldn't get the vote count they wanted, the still whining and crying Democrats have to blow things out of preportion and start claiming things like voter fraud. Odd that nobody seemed to think the election in 1976 warrented observers, even though it was incredibly close and re-counts would have been justified. Even more odd that observers weren't brought in after the 1960 election when people in Illinois liked Kennedy so much many voted for him twice. Let's not forget the surge in voter turnout among the dead in Texas.

So, in the end, I have no real problem with observers if it will shut people up. It's just a shame that people have to hide their childishness behind claims of protecting democracy.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: dmp
phadras said:
the United States, require supervision of our elections? Unless you suspect more dead people in Cooke County, Illinois... (Chicago for the uninformed) will vote is this election than in 1960 when they put JFK over the top? No you libs want to attempt to steal another election... see Florida 2000 when Gore wanted recounts in selected Demo districts not statewide....
We require no supervision and no interference from other nations...Your suggestion otherwise is to relinquish U.S. soverignty to a third party.... No doubt perfectly acceptable to the internationalists like Kerry.. Let the UN monitor our elections and our use of the military------perfect-----NONSENSE!!!!

Ah! Dead people in Cooke County, too. I had forgotten about that one.
 
MJDuncan1982 said:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/election.observers.ap/index.html

I don't understand why so many people don't want observers in our elections. What are you trying to do?

This will HELP our democracy become better and more efficient. Just because it offends some sense of pride because we are America is ridiculous.

Just because we are America doesn't mean we are .
It seems to me that the country that thinks it's elections are perfect and doesn't need to watch them is the country most prone to tamper. It often times takes an outside opinion to recognize one's faults.

Barring an exercise that could help the nature of our democracy is absolutely ridiculous and contrary to what I believe in as an American!

Tell me how having observers from other countries can help our democracy.

There are two possible outcomes:

a) They say everything is OK. So, what was the point in the first place? Has our democracy been helped? NOPE! Most people think our election processes, though far from perfect, are working. (With the exception of the Bush-hating crazies who still can't acknowledge that Bush won in 2000.)

b) They point out inconsistencies in the process. (No process is perfect.) Then whatever their "findings" might be will just be used by both parties to cry foul and make things even more partisan and antagonistic than they already are - tell me how this strengthens our democracy.

The US is not a thrid world country holding elections for the first time. There is no group intimidating people not to vote or, like Chavez, holding sole control over the elections. We have a mature democracy (it's actually a federated republic) and we do not need people from other nations "observing" our elections.

Each observer comes from another country with it's own agenda for America and many of those countries, for various reasons, are looking for opprotunities to tear America down - I, for one, will not trust anything that comes from an international team of observers.

I've got an idea, maybe we could have observers from other countries determine how we should legislate campaign finance reform.

BTW: What does "invinsible against fraud" mean?
 
Maybe a solution is a uniform voting method. Rather than states/counties/cities, etc. choosing their own voting method such as computerized, pen&paper, paper-punching, it should ALL be electronic. Not so much an Internet thing, but maybe an intranet system. You are only able to log in, and vote once. If you tried to log in again, because of the security screening (you have to enter your name, SSN, address, and such), the SSN would be linked to a separate SSA database so that if someone tries to enter someone who is dead, not a person of voting age, etc., the system will not allow that person to vote.

As far as absentee voting, I would not have any idea how that would work, but I am sure we could figure out something. Maybe a barcode type ballot. Absentees are sent a card that has barcode stickers where each barcode is set up for each candidate, and also with the absentee's name, address, ssn, etc pre-programmed into it as well. Kind of like a magnetic strip on your DL. Write ins would have a blank space, of course. And the absentee would just take and affix the sticker for his candidate on the ballot sheet. When they send in their ballots, the information and vote is contained in the barcodes, thus the vote tallyers can't read them, and they can only be scanned once. The name/address part HAS to be scanned BEFORE the candidate vote. This way, they can't be counted twice. Maybe this idea would work for both resident and absentee voters.
 
Gawd I have little patience for any American that refers to this Country as a "Democracy".

Read this MJ..."I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the REPUBLIC
for which it stands...". It doesn't say "the democracy" for which it stands.

And this now MJ...read this "We the People of the United States...", ring a bell? It doesn't say "we the world"...nope.

Back in your hole.. :eek:
 
MJDuncan1982 said:
I don't understand why so many people don't want observers in our elections. What are you trying to do?

So you seek to apply the tried and true Dem principle of "guilty until proven innocent". I don't believe that anyone on this board is in favor of fraudulent voting, yet many, if not most, are opposed to FOREIGN observers on our elections. We are not some banana republic conducting its first election after overthrowing a dictator and we certainly require no coaching from the incompetent and corrupt hacks at the UN.

MJDuncan1982 said:
This will HELP our democracy become better and more efficient. Just because it offends some sense of pride because we are America is ridiculous.

And exactly how will this "help"? Like many libs, you seem to value the opinions of outsiders above those of your own countrymen. What possible good can come from placing our most cherished institution under the auspices of foreigners? Especially since the overwhelming majority of these foreigners will be from countries which have no semblance of a democratic process. And yes, it does offend my sense of pride in our country that leftist politicians use this as a cheap election year ploy. They care nothing about the damage they may do to our sovereignty as long as they can get their sleazy faces in front of a camera.


MJDuncan1982 said:
Just because we are America doesn't mean we are invinsible against fraud.
It seems to me that the country that thinks it's elections are perfect and doesn't need to watch them is the country most prone to tamper. It often times takes an outside opinion to recognize one's faults.

Yes, there has been election fraud. Year after year DEMOCRATS have attempted to fix elections through numerous fraudulent means such as voting multiple times, registering illegal or otherwise ineligible voters, disqualifying absentee ballots, or even registering dead people. Yes, the polls need to be watched. Guess what - we don't need foreigners to do it. There are more than enough AMERICANS available to accomplish the task. Handing our responsibilities to foreign observers is part of the lib tendency to refuse to accept responsibility for anything. If our voting procedures need to be cleaned up - WE can do it - and without the damn UN sticking their anti-USA noses into our business, thank you very much. WE can pass the laws and set up the mechanism for assuring proper voting procedures are followed.


MJDuncan1982 said:
Barring an exercise that could help the nature of our democracy is absolutely ridiculous and contrary to what I believe in as an American!

If importing foreigners to handle our internal affairs is truly what you "believe in as an American", maybe you're just not much of an American. Americans do not go sniveling off to the UN to cure their problems. Americans solve their own problems- and that's a good thing, because American solutions are usually better than anybody else's.
 
Mr. P said:
Gawd I have little patience for any American that refers to this Country as a "Democracy".

Funny how they say they are more educated (aka 'brainwashed' or 'trained') yet never seem to know this. If you wanna get picky, we are actually a Representative Republic. But the Libbies want it to be a Democratic Dictatorship. To that, I say :poop:
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: dmp
MJDuncan1982 said:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/election.observers.ap/index.html

I don't understand why so many people don't want observers in our elections. What are you trying to do?

This will HELP our democracy become better and more efficient. Just because it offends some sense of pride because we are America is ridiculous.

Just because we are America doesn't mean we are invinsible against fraud.
It seems to me that the country that thinks it's elections are perfect and doesn't need to watch them is the country most prone to tamper. It often times takes an outside opinion to recognize one's faults.

Barring an exercise that could help the nature of our democracy is absolutely ridiculous and contrary to what I believe in as an American!

Outside observers who have pronounced their endorsements for a certain political party despite their inability to vote now have the opportunity to affect our election process. If outsiders were brought in that favored Republicans personally but claimed to be impartial towards our process, I'd still say hell fucking no. This is Our country and this is how we do elections. We arent some third world shithole in need of the Useless Nations assitance.
 
To begin - Can we lay off with the whole democracy/republic thing. WE ALL KNOW WE ARE A LIMITED FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC. But we use the term democracy to mean our system of government. Have you ever heard GWB preach about the ideals of a republic? No, he champions the ideals of democracy around the world.

It is being overly difficult to point out the use of the word democracy. It is the general term we use.

Secondly, you guys really think that with an electorate that is split 47-47 we can find enough people in each district who are impartial!!?? That is a pipe-dream. And you also assume that the foreigners will want to, and be able to, manipulate the election. I'm sure there are enough people around the world committed to the ideals of democracy to watch after our elections and be fair. The world is a big place.

And by the way I am not a Democrat. All this crap about stealing elections and manipulation is a problem which needs fixing. This is a possible solution. And if they find errors, yes there may be bickering for a while but we can then FIX them.

Would you prefer to have a problem in the system and simply ignore it? That is what a child does.

And I take great offense to being called un-American. This is probably where we differ. Being an American to me is believing in the principles that our Founding Fathers believed in and every soldier of this country that has died, died for. I have said this in another post but I do not love America for its geographic location or its might. I love this country for the principles it stands on. If America refuses to believe in them than I will no longer feel proud to be from this country.

That said, I will do whatever it takes to make sure that those principles, free and fair elections being one of them, are strong and cannot be messed with by those hungry for power.

And I meant to type "invincible" not "invinsible". Human here as are we all who tend to hit the wrong key occasionally.
 
We have local officials in every state whose job is to ensure that fair and accurate elections are held in their district. We don't need outsiders looking over their shoulders. And I am sure that there are more than a few people around the world, who given the chance (like election observer), would love to throw a monkey wrench into the works. All one of them has to say is something like irregularities and the whole country will go ballistic.
 
MJDuncan1982 said:
To begin - Can we lay off with the whole democracy/republic thing. WE ALL KNOW WE ARE A LIMITED FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.
Well, I accept it as a Republic with a limited Democratic form of rule.

But we use the term democracy to mean our system of government. Have you ever heard GWB preach about the ideals of a republic? No, he champions the ideals of democracy around the world.
This unfortunately, has become the common reference to our government..It's nothing more, for those that understand what we really are. The danger is many don't understand, because of the repeated reference to democracy.
It is being overly difficult to point out the use of the word democracy. It is the general term we use.
The difficulty here is educating people to their true form of government, without the liberal spin on words.
Secondly, you guys really think that with an electorate that is split 47-47 we can find enough people in each district who are impartial!!?? That is a pipe-dream. And you also assume that the foreigners will want to, and be able to, manipulate the election. I'm sure there are enough people around the world committed to the ideals of democracy to watch after our elections and be fair. The world is a big place.
I don't really believe this 47-47 at all...If true every other person I speak to would support Kerry, that ain't happening for me. All I hear on the street is Kerry is a MORON!!
And by the way I am not a Democrat. All this crap about stealing elections and manipulation is a problem which needs fixing. This is a possible solution. And if they find errors, yes there may be bickering for a while but we can then FIX them.
Sure...the extreme idiots need to get a grip and stop spewing BS about stolen elections, lies etc..etc..
Would you prefer to have a problem in the system and simply ignore it? That is what a child does.
There is no real problem that we can't solve..we don't need outside help.
And I take great offense to being called un-American. This is probably where we differ. Being an American to me is believing in the principles that our Founding Fathers believed in and every soldier of this country that has died, died for. I have said this in another post but I do not love America for its geographic location or its might. I love this country for the principles it stands on. If America refuses to believe in them than I will no longer feel proud to be from this country.
Yes, we should all respect and try to insure our founders vision continues..tell the extreme left and right that, most of us are somewhere in between.
That said, I will do whatever it takes to make sure that those principles, free and fair elections being one of them, are strong and cannot be messed with by those hungry for power.
Your suggesting that someone is trying to undermine an election? I think you're correct...LOOK LEFT.
And I meant to type "invincible" not "invinsible". Human here as are we all who tend to hit the wrong key occasionally.
Hate it when that happens.
 
I'd support it under the follwing conditions:

Each "observer" must be vetted and approved by both parties.

Each country which sends an "observer" promises (in a legally binding manner) to have the US "observe" their election.

Since I doubt either/both of these conditions will be met, it is just a tool for others to meddle in our affairs.

You seem to be under some mistaken impression that just because someone is from another country that that automatically makes them impartial. This shows how naive you must be.
 
MJDuncan1982 said:
Secondly, you guys really think that with an electorate that is split 47-47 we can find enough people in each district who are impartial!!?? That is a pipe-dream. And you also assume that the foreigners will want to, and be able to, manipulate the election. I'm sure there are enough people around the world committed to the ideals of democracy to watch after our elections and be fair. The world is a big place.

And I take great offense to being called un-American. This is probably where we differ. Being an American to me is believing in the principles that our Founding Fathers believed in and every soldier of this country that has died, died for. I have said this in another post but I do not love America for its geographic location or its might. I love this country for the principles it stands on. If America refuses to believe in them than I will no longer feel proud to be from this country.

First point - it doesn't matter how the electorate is split. You get representatives from all sides to monitor the election. Both the Democrat and Republican party have poll watchers at each voting location to assure no hanky panky. That is a procedure already in place in many jurisdictions.

And I didn't say you were un-American, I simply indicated that I didn't think that your view toward giving over our elections to foreigners made you a very good American - at least in respect to this particular issue.

And please - don't start with me with crap like "principles . . . every soldier of this country that has died, died for". I've seen lots of soldiers die and I can tell to to a degree of absolute certainty that not a single one died so that we could hand our country's election process over to the UN as you suggest.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top