How would you define a stolen election?

[Seymour Flops]

Every election has some irregularities, some rules that aid one side or the other, undue influence, and some anectdotal cases of cheating. No election is perfect. But at some point, if the fraudulent voting, rule changing, influencing, and rigging go too far, the election is a sham.

Where does an election cross the line from essentially fair to foul such that the election is delegitamized?

If possible, give a generic non-partisan principle, before launching into a partisan tirade.

I encourage the tirade, I would just like to see a real answer first.

Thanks!

 

[$ecular#eckler]

Every election has some irregularities, some rules that aid one side or the other, undue influence, and some anectdotal cases of cheating. No election is perfect.

Why is that???
What more understanding of inside information about the government do you need than that?

Do you really think you are going to encounter the political scientist guru that is going to enlighten you?

Wake the fuck up.

But at some point, if the fraudulent voting, rule changing, influencing, and rigging go too far, the election is a sham.

No shit - you just figured that out?

You're ready to think this all out, now???

Where does an election cross the line from essentially fair to foul such that the election is delegitamized? If possible, give a generic non-partisan principle, before launching into a partisan tirade.

The entire government needs to be reorganized.

I encourage the tirade, I would just like to see a real answer first.

Thanks!

The 2020 presidential election was stolen by the fool Democrat poll workers.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The 2020 presidential election was stolen by the fool Democrat poll workers.

Alright Democrats. There is a non-Democrat who could not follow the thread conventions for a single post.

Can you do better?

 

[occupied]

The real answer is that with our present sytem the larger the election the more impossible it becomes to do anything nefarious to change the outcome. You can steal a local election if it is very, very close. Other than that the only current option to rig an election is to depress turnout.

 

[Death-Ninja]

Every election has some irregularities, some rules that aid one side or the other, undue influence, and some anectdotal cases of cheating. No election is perfect. But at some point, if the fraudulent voting, rule changing, influencing, and rigging go too far, the election is a sham.

Where does an election cross the line from essentially fair to foul such that the election is delegitamized?

If possible, give a generic non-partisan principle, before launching into a partisan tirade.

I encourage the tirade, I would just like to see a real answer first.

Thanks!

When a ticket that cannot fill a drive-in movie manifests 81-million votes and the servants we entrusted call us racists and white supremacists for demanding an accounting of the most secure election in history! The moment they descended into hate and vitriol against their masters, they proved beyond all reasonable doubts that they fixed the fucker!

The only good fed is a dead fed!

 

[Seymour Flops]

The real answer is that with our present sytem the larger the election the more impossible it becomes to do anything nefarious to change the outcome.

I think that is true. And I thank you for a serious answer.

You can steal a local election if it is very, very close.

What about a state election, given that every presidential election is in reality fifty state elections and that only a few of those states are swing states key to winning the election?

Other than that the only current option to rig an election is to depress turnout.

I can see how depressing turnout would rig the election to be low turnout. Would that rig it for one side or the other?

 

[MisterBeale]

Alright Democrats. There is a non-Democrat who could not follow the thread conventions for a single post.

Can you do better?

He's not even an American. His only goal is to destroy the American Nation, and throw out the Bill of Rights.

 

[occupied]

I think that is true. And I thank you for a serious answer.

What about a state election, given that every presidential election is in reality fifty state elections and that only a few of those states are swing states key to winning the election?

I can see how depressing turnout would rig the election to be low turnout. Would that rig it for one side or the other?

With our current system any sort of large scale cheating scheme would involve recruiting far too many people to clandestinely set up and get away clean. That's why any conspiracy theory involving more than a few closely connected people is almost certainly bullshit.

 

[Godboy]

Every election has some irregularities, some rules that aid one side or the other, undue influence, and some anectdotal cases of cheating. No election is perfect. But at some point, if the fraudulent voting, rule changing, influencing, and rigging go too far, the election is a sham.

Where does an election cross the line from essentially fair to foul such that the election is delegitamized?

If possible, give a generic non-partisan principle, before launching into a partisan tirade.

I encourage the tirade, I would just like to see a real answer first.

Thanks!

Burying the Hunter story certainly counts. That is why Trump isnt president. The FBI and Big Tech successfully rigged the elections. The fucked up part is, not a single person will ever go to jail for it.

 

[Seymour Flops]

With our current system any sort of large scale cheating scheme would involve recruiting far too many people to clandestinely set up and get away clean. That's why any conspiracy theory involving more than a few closely connected people is almost certainly bullshit.

Not exactly the question, but a serious comment, so I'll give a serious answer.

Factually, you are correct, if you assume that there would be people in authority actively seeking cases of organized cheating, who have the resources and determination to catch and punish such mass cheating.

By that logic, organized crime would involve recruiting far too many people to clandestinely set up and get away clean. They would be caught and stopped if there were sufficient resources applied to stopping them by people determined to do so. Yet, organized crime is a fact of life in every country and in every era. Can I name a single person that I can prove is an organized crime gangster? Nope, but that doesn't mean it does not exist.

But you don't even need a heirarchy. Mass cheating is possible with a conspiracy of mindset, rather than a large groups of people communicating with each other, under some national leadership cadre. Relatively small cells could harvest ballots in order to ensure they are cast as the mindset clearly mandates, even without guidance from any large organization. Doesn't take a national organization for small groups to conduct voter registration drives in a cemetary, nor convince non-citizens to vote in precincts in which voter ID is not required.

All it takes is a widely accessable communications outlet or outlets that push the mindset that one candidate is so evil, and his election would bring such harm to the nations, that cheating to win seems a small price to pay to avoid that outcome. Under conditions like that widespread cheating is nearly impossible to discount, even if you can't find the leadership of such a "conspiracy."

The questions is how much is enough to invalidate an election.

 

[occupied]

Not exactly the question, but a serious comment, so I'll give a serious answer.

Factually, you are correct, if you assume that there would be people in authority actively seeking cases of organized cheating, who have the resources and determination to catch and punish such mass cheating.

By that logic, organized crime would involve recruiting far too many people to clandestinely set up and get away clean. They would be caught and stopped if there were sufficient resources applied to stopping them by people determined to do so. Yet, organized crime is a fact of life in every country and in every era. Can I name a single person that I can prove is an organized crime gangster? Nope, but that doesn't mean it does not exist.

But you don't even need a heirarchy. Mass cheating is possible with a conspiracy of mindset, rather than a large groups of people communicating with each other, under some national leadership cadre. Relatively small cells could harvest ballots in order to ensure they are cast as the mindset clearly mandates, even without guidance from any large organization. Doesn't take a national organization for small groups to conduct voter registration drives in a cemetary, nor convince non-citizens to vote in precincts in which voter ID is not required.

All it takes is a widely accessable communications outlet or outlets that push the mindset that one candidate is so evil, and his election would bring such harm to the nations, that cheating to win seems a small price to pay to avoid that outcome. Under conditions like that widespread cheating is nearly impossible to discount.

The questions is how much is enough to invalidate an election.

We know organized crime exists because it is self-evident. You can't miss the drug trade, gang murder, human trafficking and paid off law enforcement. The little fish go to jail in huge numbers because people blab. Your theory fails because there is no hard evidence it happens at all. An operation that big cannot remain hidden.

 

[Seymour Flops]

We know organized crime exists because it is self-evident. You can't miss the drug trade, gang murder, human trafficking and paid off law enforcement. The little fish go to jail in huge numbers because people blab. Your theory fails because there is no hard evidence it happens at all. An operation that big cannot remain hidden.

Agree to disagree. Back to my question. You can answer it as a hypothetical.

 

[MisterBeale]

This person once ran on the top of the ticket for the Green Party, and is likewise, a personal friend of Ron Paul. She has intimate knowledge of how elections were corrupt, all the way back to the 2000 election, and also knows, how both parties are hopelessly corrupt, including the congressional black caucus.

As a political scientist myself, I understand, and follow her for her astute and concise take on world events and for her professional training in political science. Though her personal politics are liberal, she is more concerned with process over politics, and will make common cause and friends with anyone with integrity. She has a unique take on stolen elections, having been the victim of them herself, IMO. And YES, she maintains, emphatically, the 2020 elections was stolen, which disenfranchised millions, and was a tragedy of unimaginable proportions for our nation, regardless of your opinion of Trump.

I don't necessarily, of course, agree with all of her work, but she she is more trustworthy and insightful the most of our current politicians. And will certainly give you a better insight about the situation, if you are ready to listen. She, like Ron Paul, was in the belly of the beast.

"Q. We hear a lot of terms and acronyms bandied about. ‘Deep State’ … ‘MIC’ … ‘FIRE sector’ … ‘ruling elite’ … ‘oligarchy’ … ‘neocons’. Who actually defines and sets America’s geopolitical priorities and determines our foreign policy? Not “officially”. Not constitutionally. But de facto.

CM: As you have probably noticed, the signature of my e-mails has a quote from a U.K. television series: “You get to the top and you realize it’s only the middle.” Tom Dawkins, UK Prime Minister in the 2012 TV series, Secret State. I watched every minute of this TV series and when this was uttered by the actor portraying the U.K. Prime Minister, I knew this was what I would call “faction.” Because that is exactly the way I felt upon realizing that Members of Congress don’t call the shots; they are mere actors [with a whole lot of squandered power that could be used to actually HELP people—including their constituents and those harmed by U.S. foreign and military policies] who trick their constituents. They are also cowards, because they could say no to these people, but they don’t dare. They are also narcissists because they think they’re smarter than their constituents and in many cases, also the donors, too. I saw some of them playing games with the so-called report cards from lobbyists, scoring 50% on them all and then collecting money from both sides on every issue!! Some committees are known as “money committees” and those are highly sought after—not for their jurisdiction, but for their rewards in campaign contributions! Thus, from the very beginning, the purpose and process of U.S. policy-making has been corrupted. I had one famous Congresswoman tell me, “Cynthia, you just have to accept that when the [Democratic Party] Leadership tell us to do something, we’re going to do it!” So, these narcissists who trade your hopes and dreams for favors from the rich and powerful accustomed to getting their way all the time, aren’t even leaders, either! They’re followers at best, cowards. Because, in the end, they don’t want to end up like me—out of the position that allows them adoration from the public and favored by the rich and powerful. If that means “shaving around the edges” of your morals, values, and principles, so be it. The primordial objective, once you’re there, is to stay there until you die. Your life becomes one long LSD trip. [Mind you, I’ve never been on an LSD trip, but I understand that people find it enjoyable, exceptionally revealing, and way more interesting than the, by-comparison, mundane world.] I had people calling me, visiting me, offering me fame and longevity in Congress. All I had to do was become “theirs.” One rabbi told me that he would “broker” me to the Jewish community if I were to agree to “come under my stable.” By now, everyone who knows me knows about the oath to Israel that I was basically forced to sign—I refused. The others who manage to stay in U.S. elected offices have signed a loyalty oath in one form or another to a foreign country. I don’t know of anything more heinous—other than that those who demand fealty to another country operate in our country with impunity. They have been caught by FBI translators trading U.S. national security secrets to other countries with impunity. Instead, the FBI translator who heard these conversations was, herself, punished and silenced! Not the traitors! One clear reading of the COINTELPRO papers and the Frank Church Committee Reports makes it clear that evil [I know of no other way to describe them] people are giving the orders and another set of evil operatives who wield official power are implementing those orders. The political institutions of the U.S. are spent. They and the people who occupy them need to be razed and we should start all over again—with only the Bill of Rights as our guide. I am not afraid to envision another political system for the U.S. I think global kakistocracy and psychopathocracy are the clear results of indirect democracy—what a Republic is. And if a Republic is INdirect democracy, I believe it’s time for us to try DIRECT democracy.
"

Cynthia McKinney Interview: An Objective Look at U.S. Foreign Policy – Peace Dividend

peacedividend.us

If you are unable to handle deep, intricate, intellectual, and, yes, verbose analysis, I suggest you skip it.

Minute mark 16:44 I believe.

Athan Gibbs - Wikispooks

wikispooks.com

 

[playtime]

gerrymandering

1. manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favor one party or class.
   • achieve (a result) by manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency.
     
     
     Voter caging and purging
   • 
     Voter caging is the practice of sending mail to registered voters and challenging their eligibility to vote if the mail is returned as undeliverable. Voter purging is the practice of removing names from the voter rolls, or the list of registered voters
     
     
   • 
     
     

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

The extreme example of 'cheating' is Putin's sham elections in the Ukraine. Forcing votes at gunpoint...no anonymity, etc. Those elections were not stolen though..they went exactly as planned.

Many of the examples I see put forth here as cheating really are not. Exploiting the media is not cheating, it's business as usual.
Slant, spin and outright lies are the politician's stock in trade, after all. Is demagoguery cheating? Race-baiting? Pandering?
Nope...is the American way~

That the system is rigged should not surprise anyone--it was designed that way.

The complainers are upset that it's not rigged their way, is all. Or..that it once had been their rigged game..and now it is not?

Had Trump won...and clear evidence of fraud..the proverbial smoking gun..far more than is alleged--was presented--would the Right gasp, 'oh noes'..and dethrone Trump?

I think not.

 

[MisterBeale]

gerrymandering

1. manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favor one party or class.
   • achieve (a result) by manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency.
     
     
     Voter caging and purging
   • 
     Voter caging is the practice of sending mail to registered voters and challenging their eligibility to vote if the mail is returned as undeliverable. Voter purging is the practice of removing names from the voter rolls, or the list of registered voters
     
     
   • 
     

Corporate controlled electronic voting machines with opaque source code.

Ballot harvesting.

 

[occupied]

Agree to disagree. Back to my question. You can answer it as a hypothetical.

My honest hypothetical answer is I don't know. I do not think it's something that could ever happen and remain hidden. Since it's not within the realm of possibility you may as well be asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Any answer to an unanswerable question is meaningless.

 

[DGS49]

Imagine this: A State has very clear policies and procedures regarding voting. The are defined by both laws and the state Constitution, which are fully in accord with one another. One can either vote in person with a photo ID, or vote by Absentee Ballot (if you CANNOT be at the polls on Election Day). That's it: one or the other. An Absentee Ballot requires a photocopy of one's ID, and a notary stamp, confirming that the person submitting the ballot is who s/he claims to be.

The U.S. Constitution states very clearly that the rules for elections in EVERY State must be formulated by the STATE LEGISLATURE, and no one else. That is the state of affairs in the State in question, The legislature has spoken.

And yet, some local bureaucrats in the most populous regions (the big cities which have huge Democrat majorities, unlike the remainder of the State), prompted by Leftist operative teams of lawyers, change the voting rules, making un-certified, un-secure, un-traceable Mail-In Ballots the norm. When challenged in Court prior to the election, the State Supreme Court (5-2 Democrat majority) finds NO PROBLEM with the illegal and unconstitutional changes to the voting rules. Pandemic, and all that. [Not mentioned in either the State's or the country's Constitutions]. And faced with a clear decision from the State's Supreme Court, the United States Supreme Court decides that if the highest court in the State has spoken, that's it. It refused to hear any arguments, despite blatant flouting of law and both applicable Constitutions.

The State is carried for the Democrat candidate by late-coming massive majorities in the aforesaid Democrat-run cities, almost entirely fueled by tens of thousands of the aforesaid illegal, unconstitutional, un-secure, un-traceable mail-in ballots.

With respect to the State in question, does that clear the bar for a "stolen election"? The answer is obvious.

I'm speaking of course of Pennsylvania, but a similar tale could produced for Georgia, Wisconsin, Arizona, and a few others.

"The cleanest, most secure election in American history!" Right.

 

[okfine]

Godboy

Every election has some irregularities, some rules that aid one side or the other, undue influence, and some anectdotal cases of cheating. No election is perfect. But at some point, if the fraudulent voting, rule changing, influencing, and rigging go too far, the election is a sham.

Where does an election cross the line from essentially fair to foul such that the election is delegitamized?

If possible, give a generic non-partisan principle, before launching into a partisan tirade.

I encourage the tirade, I would just like to see a real answer first.

Thanks!

Define a stolen election... like the one you lost. Of course. That one.

 

[candycorn]

My honest hypothetical answer is I don't know. I do not think it's something that could ever happen and remain hidden. Since it's not within the realm of possibility you may as well be asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Any answer to an unanswerable question is meaningless.

It highlights, in my view, the genius of the Electoral college to some extent.

If you did have one cell of highly localized, highly organized, highly loyal, highly motivated folks bent on turning an election, maintaining operational security, who have access to a network of voters whose votes are going to be both valid as well as undetectable in terms of duplicity, fraud, or any other nefarious means...they can, at worse, they could only sway one state's electoral vote. Also keep in mind, that even while all of these votes are happening for the President, they also will have to pass the scrutiny of the civic and statewide races as well. That only the blob was screaming election fraud is telling...what about the down ballot races that were affected by all of these alleged fraudulent ballots?