Please critique my proposed policy to ensure an honest vote

[Foxfyre]

Too bad you don't have an all mail voting system. The checks built into a mail voting system would catch most invalid votes.

Would it? When we could have ordered three more ballots in addition to the three we received for two people? We have had people living with us over the years at this address and for all I know they're still on the rolls. Would a mail in ballot system catch it if we had chosen to vote in their names? Mail in ballots are so subject to fraud that I wonder why it's only U.S. Democrats that seem to trust them?

Strict mail-in voting rules maintained by foreign nations, new report finds

The report examines voting laws in countries in the European Union (EU), non-EU states in Europe and members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) -- an international body consisting largely of developed and free countries throughout Europe, North America, Asia and...

www.foxnews.com

 

[Foxfyre]

Canada votes for a single position, ONE, 1 on the ballot. Our precincts are also very small, usually a few hundred voters. It's easy to had count those.

And we have 9 or10 times the population you do and easily 9 or 10 times the volunteers to work the polls. So Canada only elects one person?

 

[AsherN]

And we have 9 or10 times the population you do and easily 9 or 10 times the volunteers to work the polls. So Canada only elects one person?

We only elect our local MP. The leader of the party with the most vote becomes Prime Minister or Premier.

We have more complicated ballots for municipal elections as we vote for ward rep, mayor, school trustee and sometimes regional councilor. But precincts are even smaller. And this year in the coming election, my city has on-line voting. Plus advanced polls. we do everything we can to make sure people vote. by law, employers must give 4 consecutive hours for workers to vote.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

What the Jan 6 protest was all about until a few idiots decided to start a riot was to convince Congress to delay that certification until the investigations and audits could be completed.

No. Congress cannot delay certification on the day of the protest, because the election was certified on December 14 by each state and placed into what is called safe harbor. There are no audits and investigations when all the states electors were certified and sealed on or before the December 14 deadline.

Trump said on Jan6 exactly what the ‘event’ was about and it relied on Mike Pence committing fraud by recognizing certifications from fake Republican electors from seven states Trump lost.

Jan6 was a planned event to make Trump the winner of an election he knew he lost.

DJTtweet8:17* January 6, 2021 8:17 a.m.: Trump tweets: "States want to correct their votes, which they now know were based on irregularities and fraud, plus corrupt process never received legislative approval. All Mike Pence has to do is send them back to the States, AND WE WIN. Do it Mike, this is a time for extreme courage!" 21JAN06-DJTtweet8:17​

Trump’s tweet starts with the lie that States want to correct their votes.

There was no attempt Foxfyre by protestors to convince Congress to delay the certification until the investigations and audits could be completed.

The gathering of an angry protesting mob was directed by Trump to march to the Capitol under the banner of stop the steal so he could win. He said that live at the rally too.

Trump rallying the forces at noon January 6, 2021: - - - “John [Eastman] is one of the most brilliant lawyers in the country, and he looked at this and he said, “What an absolute disgrace that this can be happening to our Constitution.” And he looked at Mike Pence, and I hope Mike is going to do the right thing. I hope so. I hope so. - - - Because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election. All he has to do, all this is, this is from the number one, or certainly one of the top, Constitutional lawyers in our country. He has the absolute right to do it. We’re supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our Constitution, and protect our constitution. - - - States want to revote. The states got defrauded, They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest people.” 21JAN06-DJT-jEASTMAN​

 

[Foxfyre]

We only elect our local MP. The leader of the party with the most vote becomes Prime Minister or Premier.

We have more complicated ballots for municipal elections as we vote for ward rep, mayor, school trustee and sometimes regional councilor. But precincts are even smaller. And this year in the coming election, my city has on-line voting. Plus advanced polls. we do everything we can to make sure people vote. by law, employers must give 4 consecutive hours for workers to vote.

With very small precincts, and many U.S. precincts are very small, it would be easier to detect a lot of vote padding. And since we have a constitutional representative republic instead of a parliamentary system, the dynamics are much different.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Disagreement is good and, when sincere, I appreciate it.

If you think disagreement is good then you would recognize my disagreement is good. And my desire to have every American believe our elections are fair, secure honest and constitutionally correct and available to every single law abiding American citizen who had a right to vote, is as sincere as yours.


I disagree on several counts, here is one:

1. Mistrust of our election system must be based upon evidence of actual fraud that survives in a court of law and a decision is made. If it is not based on law, mistrust cannot be eradicated by changing the process.

There never will be resolution if a large block of voters are convinced that there is no obligation to demand evidence of fraud presented in a court of law, from a loser candidate, because the loser’s suspicion of fraud is enough, is the new normal?

Why am I wrong?

 

[Flopper]

There were ENTIRE batches of ballots that came in with 99% of them all marked for Biden. That was a statistical impossibility. And the simultaneous nature of it - with all five states halting the count at the same time, with flimsy excuses - tells me this was all planned as a Plan B, should Trump be way ahead.

And yet, Biden et all has demonized the 60 million voters who dare question the impossible events of that night as “threats to democracy.”

The sad thing is….have any safeguards been put in to prevent a recurrence? For all we know, we have Zuckerberg’s activists out right now, going door to door in the poor, ignorant neighborhoods of Philly and Atlanta, harvesting ballots.

It would not be statistical impossible if it was a predominantly black area. Biden got 87% of the Black vote.

Big lie number 9871 5 states all halted counting at the same time.

Fact check: List of partly false statements on the 2020 election

Social media users have been sharing a long post online that contains various claims about the 2020 election. The list contains a mixture of opinion and mostly false information this article seeks to address.

www.reuters.com

 

[Flopper]

We have it on video. We know it happened.

Let's see it.

You just keep convincing republicans who lack a brain that such bullshit is actually election fraud. They are already threaten not to vote until the problem is fixed. Keep it up.

 

[scruffy]

59% of Americans do have confidence in our elections.

I doubt that very much.

If they do they're pretty ignorant, aren't they?

 

[scruffy]

It would not be statistical impossible if it was a predominantly black area. Biden got 87% of the Black vote.

Big lie number 9871 5 states all halted counting at the same time.

Fact check: List of partly false statements on the 2020 election

Social media users have been sharing a long post online that contains various claims about the 2020 election. The list contains a mixture of opinion and mostly false information this article seeks to address.

www.reuters.com

Don't bring the lying leftist fact checkers into the discussion

You know goddamn well they're paid propagandists

 

[scruffy]

Let's see it.

You just keep convincing republicans who lack a brain that such bullshit is actually election fraud. They are already threaten not to vote until the problem is fixed. Keep it up.

Hey man, I told you, STOP with the stupid.

Go away with that partisan bullshit. Find another thread.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

But to recap just some of the evidence that there is widespread distrust of the system and why that distrust exists whether or not there is proof justifying the distrust:

NFBW: When there is no proof justifying the distrust how can you justify changing the system or process that is not causing the distrust? END2210152348

 

[scruffy]

NFBW: When there is no proof justifying the distrust how can you justify changing the system or process that is not causing the distrust? END2210152348

Now YOU'RE being stupid.

1. The election system does not meet modern security standards. Not even close.

2. There is plenty of EVIDENCE of election tampering. Fortunately, we don't have to meet your leftard standard of proof.

3. The distrust is because of actual events that actually happened. Hundreds of millions of people saw it live on international television.

4. We CARE about the INTEGRITY of our vote. I will not have my vote stolen or diluted. Not by partisans, and not by people with money, and not by people with their heads up their ideological butts.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

1. The election system does not meet modern security standards.

NFBW: Then upgrade them all to modern security standards. I am all for it.

Don’t do it thinking you are removing one iota of the ‘distrust of the system’ from the “stop the 2020 steal” minded voter who makes up about one third of the electorate right now.

The stop the steal mentality briuffgh ti the brink of a violent constitutional crisis stage in America on Jan6.

I do not agree with the premise of this thread that changing the system will have an healing or well meaning impact on those who no longer care about law and order based on the rule of law when it come to trusting the election system..

And then there is Foxfyre ’s refusal to discuss a sincere disagreement with his contention that assumes even when there is no proof of actual fraud causing widespread distrust of the system that upgrading the system to modern security standards etc or to entirely hand counted system, will eliminate distrust of the system in the wing of America’s voting population that is ideologically connected to a big time loser of an election who will not concede to a loss under any circumstances, including no court tested evidence that demonstrates it was fraud that caused the distraught candidate to lose?

Foxfyre221014-#393 “But to recap just some of the evidence that there is widespread distrust of the system and why that distrust exists whether or not there is proof justifying the distrust:”
NFBW221015-#506 “When there is no proof justifying the distrust how can you justify changing the system or process that is not causing the distrust”

END2210160139

 

[NotfooledbyW]

3. The distrust is because of actual events that actually happened. Hundreds of millions of people saw it live on international television.

What network, date and time did hundreds of millions witness crimes by persons on video recordings that cannot be identified, indicted and prosecuted.?

 

[Kondor3]

Okay. In 2024 the White House and Congress may be pretty darn Republican. You're comfortable with those Republicans setting up the federal infrastructure for elections?

I am comfortable with Americans of EITHER party who are loyal to the Republic and the Constitution (and NOT to a personality) to set up such infrastructure.

 

[scruffy]

NFBW: Then upgrade them all to modern security standards. I am all for it.

lol

Just snap my fingers and do it? Just like that?

Don’t do it thinking you are removing one iota of the ‘distrust of the system’ from the “stop the 2020 steal” minded voter who makes up about one third of the electorate right now.

I spent some time as a corporate change consultant. But that was in a company with only 40,000 employees. Whose job skills, ease of work, and pay all got better as the result of the change. That DOESN'T mean they were easy to convince. They came up with all KINDS of prejudiced and excuses, and some we simply had to fire (mostly because they were poisoning the others with their bullshit).

Can you imagine what this effort looks like with 350 million people and a management that's against you?

lol

The stop the steal mentality briuffgh ti the brink of a violent constitutional crisis stage in America on Jan6.

Yeah yeah yeah call it what you want, but the truth is this:

There are plenty of people ALL OVER THE WORLD - INCLUDING Americans, who believe that electoral shenanigans took place.

There is NOTHING fraudulent or cultish or foolish about that belief. Nothing at all.

You may be able to get away with mudslinging against your American opposition, but you can't blame foreigners for being Trumptards

I do not agree with the premise of this thread that changing the system will have an healing or well meaning impact on those who no longer care about law and order based on the rule of law when it come to trusting the election system..

You disagree because you've never seen it in action. I have. I made it happen. On a smaller scale, to be sure. But my processes are running in the field, today, with zero problems. Everyone's a happy camper. The company is making money hand over fist. Thanks to the new system.

And then there is Foxfyre ’s refusal to discuss a sincere disagreement with his contention that assumes even when there is no proof of actual fraud causing widespread distrust of the system that upgrading the system to modern security standards etc or to entirely hand counted system, will eliminate distrust of the system in the wing of America’s voting population that is ideologically connected to a big time loser of an election who will not concede to a loss under any circumstances, including no court tested evidence that demonstrates it was fraud that caused the distraught candidate to lose?

Every single one of the people cited believes there was fraud, and believes there is sufficient evidence of fraud.

Again - we don't need to subscribe to your leftard standards of proof. Proof is not the issue, belief is the issue. And we will change the belief system of 70 million people just like we changed the belief systems of 40,000. The method is scalable.

Foxfyre221014-#393 “But to recap just some of the evidence that there is widespread distrust of the system and why that distrust exists whether or not there is proof justifying the distrust:”
NFBW221015-#506 “When there is no proof justifying the distrust how can you justify changing the system or process that is not causing the distrust”

END2210160139

See above.

There is plenty of evidence of tomfoolery.

Plenty of examples of broken machines.

All KINDS of problems exist.

 

[candycorn]

There is NOTHING fraudulent or cultish or foolish about that belief. Nothing at all.

Scuzzy....So the same standard applies to believing in unicorns, bigfoot, and the Easter bunny.... zero proof exists for the existence of any of those items as there is zero proof exists for this mythical voter fraud you "believe" happened. Right?

 

[candycorn]

NFBW: Then upgrade them all to modern security standards. I am all for it.

Don’t do it thinking you are removing one iota of the ‘distrust of the system’ from the “stop the 2020 steal” minded voter who makes up about one third of the electorate right now.

The stop the steal mentality briuffgh ti the brink of a violent constitutional crisis stage in America on Jan6.

I do not agree with the premise of this thread that changing the system will have an healing or well meaning impact on those who no longer care about law and order based on the rule of law when it come to trusting the election system..

And then there is Foxfyre ’s refusal to discuss a sincere disagreement with his contention that assumes even when there is no proof of actual fraud causing widespread distrust of the system that upgrading the system to modern security standards etc or to entirely hand counted system, will eliminate distrust of the system in the wing of America’s voting population that is ideologically connected to a big time loser of an election who will not concede to a loss under any circumstances, including no court tested evidence that demonstrates it was fraud that caused the distraught candidate to lose?

Foxfyre221014-#393 “But to recap just some of the evidence that there is widespread distrust of the system and why that distrust exists whether or not there is proof justifying the distrust:”
NFBW221015-#506 “When there is no proof justifying the distrust how can you justify changing the system or process that is not causing the distrust”

END2210160139

And, of course, once you upgrade the system...it then will quickly become, "The company that did the upgrades had ties to the Democratic party" the very first time an election doesn't go Trump's way.

The better strategy is to just keep on hitting the pinata every time they put it out there with another claim of fraud. Eventually they will either stop or go away or stop voting all together.... Any of the 3 three are wins for the left.

 

[candycorn]

Um folks could we keep the food fight to a minimum here? It isn't helpful and that also tends to derail the thread.

I am pretty much ignoring those who are just trolling and/or trying to stir up a food fight and/or change the subject.

Even before the 2020 election, even before COVID created the highly questionable processes of voting that so many object to, the electorate did not have much faith in the system or process:

". . .A Gallup poll released Thursday found that 59% of Americans don't have confidence in the honesty of elections, while 40% say they do. The latest data for the U.S. comes from polling conducted from April to May 2019, when U.S. intelligence agencies confirmed allegations of foreign interference in the 2016 presidential election and similar activity in the 2018 midterms. . ."

https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2020-02-13/majority-of-americans-dont-trust-elections-poll

At that time a LOT of people who distrusted the system were on the left and were blaming Trump for not shoring up election systems and security:
"A lot of Americans don't trust the electoral system despite massive efforts by government officials to tighten security and boost voter confidence. This is according to a new poll by NPR, PBS NewsHour and Marist. The poll finds deep partisan divides over what threatens U.S. elections, whether it's foreign interference, disinformation, suppression or fraud, and many blame President Trump for not doing enough. . .


By the end of 2020 the left was mostly happy with the altered systems and processes hastily created because of COVID. Most of those on the right were appalled and remain so and have been joined by some on the left. And some strong leftists like Tulsi Gabbard joined with the right in protesting some of the more questionable processes like ballot harvesting:

AOC Calls Out Tulsi Gabbard For Amplifying Voter Fraud Story

The subject of the Project Veritas video alleging Representative Ilhan Omar of voter fraud said he was "set up" by the conservative media organization.

www.newsweek.com

I still don't understand why ANY honorable person would not support election policy in which ALL Americans of whatever political party or whatever ideology or whatever the outcome would have confidence that the vote was honest, fair, accurate.

You said earlier that we used to count ballots by hand.

I asked you when the last time a place like Orange County counted their ballots by hand.

You, of course, never answered.

Why? Because it would point out how tragically stupid the idea is of hand counting 3,000,000 ballots with 40-50 observers watching every counter.

---

When Trump runs again, and loses again, you'll swear that election was illegitimate if he tells you to. So for you to talk about honor is rather hilarious.