Trump Dissolves Voter Fraud Commission

[Syriusly]

Can you prove voter fraud in favor of Trump?

If there were actually any fraud every proven, it could never be proven whom the fraud went to as we do not record a person's actual vote and time it to name.

It's not how they vote, it's IF they vote, and harder ID requirements coupled with more rigorous audits of WHO votes would fix that.

Which makes your question to Syriusly a stupid question. Why did you even ask it if this is your reply?

No, it's makes my point the whole point. Progs ***** about "we don't see any fraud". When others propose methods to make fraud harder or more visible, progs ***** "that is surpressing voting!!!"

Awful self serving of them.

Voter fraud is ridiculously limited.

There have been fewer than 1,000 convictions of voter fraud since 2000...

Trump orders voter fraud commission dissolved

Meanwhile, there have been roughly 2 billion votes cast over that period. That puts the conviction rate per vote somewhere in the neighborhood of: 0.000000484

You would think if there was 'massive voter fraud' and if there were 3-5 million fraudulent votes cast in 2016- there would be some evidence of it.

It is almost as if Contards are just pulling this BS out of their ass.....

 

[Faun]

On the federal level, because they rarely investigate it.


Illegal voting investigation grows dramatically

And the difference if one vote can make all the difference. VA for example, dear.

If there were actually any fraud every proven, it could never be proven whom the fraud went to as we do not record a person's actual vote and time it to name.

It's not how they vote, it's IF they vote, and harder ID requirements coupled with more rigorous audits of WHO votes would fix that.

Which makes your question to Syriusly a stupid question. Why did you even ask it if this is your reply?

No, it's makes my point the whole point. Progs ***** about "we don't see any fraud". When others propose methods to make fraud harder or more visible, progs ***** "that is surpressing voting!!!"

Awful self serving of them.

Voter fraud is ridiculously limited.

There have been fewer than 1,000 convictions of voter fraud since 2000...

Trump orders voter fraud commission dissolved

Meanwhile, there have been roughly 2 billion votes cast over that period. That puts the conviction rate per vote somewhere in the neighborhood of: 0.000000484

Too bad your article doesn’t say how many actually voted illegally.

 

[Syriusly]

Wait, aren't the progressives always claiming there is no voter fraud?

Yes, and we still claim that. What the hell is your point?

Voter Fraud is done by mail. So if a family member dies, you can put them in the ground and not notify anyone.

And you just keep voting for them.


There are no laws that prohibit home burial, but you must check local zoning laws before establishing a home cemetery or burying on private land.

• Alabama
• Alaska
• Arizona
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Florida
• Georgia
• Hawaii
• Idaho
• Iowa
• Kansas
• Kentucky
• Louisiana
• Maine
• Massachusetts
• Minnesota
• Mississippi
• Missouri
• Montana
• Nebraska
• Nevada
• New Hampshire
• New Mexico
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Ohio
• Oklahoma
• Oregon
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• Texas
• Utah
• Vermont
• Virginia
• West Virginia
• Wisconsin
• Wyoming

Btw: When people ask where is someone, they say they moved away.

As I recall down to Mexico where it cheaper to live. Just can’t recall the town name. Sorry.

btw2: MOST Red States are way below the average death per 100K rate by 60%.
******'s never die in red states. Yep, you got it. ****** can be put in the ground at your home. Colors get NO zoning clearances in ****** controlled states, to do the same, so they have to report their dead. That's how they keep their ****** districts floating. And the Colored districts under control and fewer.

Certainly vote by mail lends itself to voter fraud more than in person voting. But I don't know of any evidence to support any significant voter fraud by mail either.

 

[depotoo]

Once again, even one fraudulent vote is too many. 100,000 in just one county alone!
It can change an election. But of that, you do not care.
And for those they were able to document, how many others were not? Let’s say 100 for every one. That would be 60,000 fraudulent votes in a federal election. Enough, if in the right areas, to change the outcome. How many roadblocks are constantly thrown out there by lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to even verify if someone registered is legal or not?
You do understand the difficultly in verifying a vote, that is anonymous, to begin with, is? Correct?

The constant whining from the left regarding voting with id, the roadblocks and lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to verify, is enough to make anyone that values their vote, left or right, to become suspect.

Bull. And once again you show you care not for anyone else’s vote but your sides. Even one illegitimate vote is too many. Ever heard of Adlai Stevenson?


Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A
Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A grand jury later determined that Adlai Stevenson had unwittingly benefited from some 100,000 illegal ballots that had been cast in Chicago in the 1982 gubernatorial election. U.S. to probe primary vote fraud, Chicago Tribune, March 11, 1987.

Adlai Ewing Stevenson, III - Genealogy


Voter Fraud Database Tops 1,000 Proven Cases

Democrat Leaders, Al Sharpton Give Heroes Welcome To Woman Convicted Of Multiple Counts Of Voter Fraud

Indeed, recent elections bear this out. In 2015, a city council election in the New Jersey town of Perth Amboy was decided by a mere 10 votes. A judge overturned the election and ordered a new one after it was revealed that at least 13 illegal absentee ballots had been cast. The 2003 mayoral primary in East Chicago, Indiana, was overturned by the state Supreme Court after evidence of widespread fraud was revealed. The new election resulted in a different winner. Numerous convictions for election fraud resulted from this election, and are documented in The Heritage Foundation’s Voter Fraud Database.

It has been a thorn in my side for years, as well as others. There are studies showing it is a problem. Those same studies are poopooed by the Dems for one reason and one reason only.
It’s sad you don’t cherish your vote. Though, you don’t have to worry, since most illegal votes go your way. Well, I care. Why vote, if you can’t be assured some illegal vote is not going to wipe yours out, as a legitimate citizen single vote? I’ll be damned if we give up on making sure all votes are legitimate. Otherwise we are no better than a banana republic.

There are no legit studies showing that widespread voter fraud is an issue. Every study ever done on the subject finds less than 1% of votes are a problem, normally way less than 1%.

I cherish the right to vote more than you do, which is why I will fight against right wing zealots such as yourself that wants to keep people from voting unless they vote your way.

No fraudulent votes go my way, as nobody is going to cheat to vote for Gary Johnson or Michael Badnarik.

The Heritage foundation database is the best evidence against widespread voter fraud there is.

Two decades worth of data. How many votes do you suppose have been cast in the last 2 decades in the US? Lets low ball it and say that in that time there have been a half billion votes cast in that time. And the database has 1,107 proven cases of voter fraud.

So, 1107 out of a half a billion.

And for that you want to risk people incorrectly being barred from voting. Admit, you only want people who will vote for the GOP to vote, and nobody else.

 

[Syriusly]

Brennan center, lol.

NYU law school group claiming to be "non-partisan"

****.

They linked at least a hundred separate studies, but your twattery kept you from reading them.
Try this one Trumpflake - it was the BUSH DOJ:
In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud

Studies....


Hard to find evidence when your side is the one benefitting from any fraud.

If there actually is fraud- how would you know which side is benefiting?

LOL- hell if there was massive voter fraud in 2016 then it might mean that Trump didn't actually even win the electoral vote!

 

[Syriusly]

Once again, even one fraudulent vote is too many. 100,000 in just one county alone! e.

[/QUOTE]

One fraudulent vote is too many.

One person denied their right to vote is also too many.

Contards are happy to require a person who has voted for 70 years without presenting ID- to suddenly require an ID to vote.

And will happily deny that person their vote if they don't bring their ID with them.

Because Contards care about the vote so much....so much that you Contards can't even find any evidence of the 'massive voter fraud' you whine happened.

 

[DrLove]

If there actually is fraud- how would you know which side is benefiting?

LOL- hell if there was massive voter fraud in 2016 then it might mean that Trump didn't actually even win the electoral vote!

Yep, he only won the EC by 77,000 votes in three states. Who knows - might have been massive double T-Rump voters!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Just reported on CNN by Wolf Blitzer. So, apparently Trump finally realized his "voter fraud" claims are bullshit. Most of us already knew that. Here are a few links:

Trump Suddenly Ends Voter Fraud Panel

Trump signs order disbanding voter fraud commission

Trump dissolves voter fraud commission

Yet another Trump failure, yet another failed attempt by Trump to violate citizens' right to vote.

 

[Faun]

Which makes your question to Syriusly a stupid question. Why did you even ask it if this is your reply?

No, it's makes my point the whole point. Progs ***** about "we don't see any fraud". When others propose methods to make fraud harder or more visible, progs ***** "that is surpressing voting!!!"

Awful self serving of them.

Voter fraud is ridiculously limited.

There have been fewer than 1,000 convictions of voter fraud since 2000...

Trump orders voter fraud commission dissolved

Meanwhile, there have been roughly 2 billion votes cast over that period. That puts the conviction rate per vote somewhere in the neighborhood of: 0.000000484

So all criminal acts result in convictions?

Again, the issue is we don't know the extent of the problem because of the difficulty in figuring out who exactly is voting.

If it doesn’t end in a conviction, it’s not a criminal act. What we do know is voter fraud is not wide spread with only a handful of people getting caught in most elections.

Wrong. criminal acts occur all the time without even prosecution happening. It's called "getting away with it"

Willful ignorance on your part.

Nope. Tracking down folks who vote improperly is very easy since there’s a documented paper trail. Of all those suspected of voter fraud, 99% of the cases result in in either no charges of acquittals. Only 1% end up getting convicted, resulting in 938 convictions. The other 93,000 committed no crime in voting.

 

[Faun]

Studies....


Hard to find evidence when your side is the one benefitting from any fraud.

Please provide the evidence of which side is beneiging from any fraud...you made a claim, now back it up

First:

Second, the side promising free stuff is probably the side that would be OK with voter fraud.

LOL

You weren’t asked which side is ok with it, you were asked to prove which side benefiting from voter fraud.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Once again, even one fraudulent vote is too many. ...

And one person legally allowed to vote that is denied that right, even once, is one too many. This is part that you ignore and truly just do not care about.

 

[Faun]

Once again, even one fraudulent vote is too many. 100,000 in just one county alone!
It can change an election. But of that, you do not care.
And for those they were able to document, how many others were not? Let’s say 100 for every one. That would be 60,000 fraudulent votes in a federal election. Enough, if in the right areas, to change the outcome. How many roadblocks are constantly thrown out there by lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to even verify if someone registered is legal or not?
You do understand the difficultly in verifying a vote, that is anonymous, to begin with, is? Correct?

The constant whining from the left regarding voting with id, the roadblocks and lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to verify, is enough to make anyone that values their vote, left or right, to become suspect.

Bull. And once again you show you care not for anyone else’s vote but your sides. Even one illegitimate vote is too many. Ever heard of Adlai Stevenson?


Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A
Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A grand jury later determined that Adlai Stevenson had unwittingly benefited from some 100,000 illegal ballots that had been cast in Chicago in the 1982 gubernatorial election. U.S. to probe primary vote fraud, Chicago Tribune, March 11, 1987.

Adlai Ewing Stevenson, III - Genealogy


Voter Fraud Database Tops 1,000 Proven Cases

Democrat Leaders, Al Sharpton Give Heroes Welcome To Woman Convicted Of Multiple Counts Of Voter Fraud

Indeed, recent elections bear this out. In 2015, a city council election in the New Jersey town of Perth Amboy was decided by a mere 10 votes. A judge overturned the election and ordered a new one after it was revealed that at least 13 illegal absentee ballots had been cast. The 2003 mayoral primary in East Chicago, Indiana, was overturned by the state Supreme Court after evidence of widespread fraud was revealed. The new election resulted in a different winner. Numerous convictions for election fraud resulted from this election, and are documented in The Heritage Foundation’s Voter Fraud Database.

It has been a thorn in my side for years, as well as others. There are studies showing it is a problem. Those same studies are poopooed by the Dems for one reason and one reason only.
It’s sad you don’t cherish your vote. Though, you don’t have to worry, since most illegal votes go your way. Well, I care. Why vote, if you can’t be assured some illegal vote is not going to wipe yours out, as a legitimate citizen single vote? I’ll be damned if we give up on making sure all votes are legitimate. Otherwise we are no better than a banana republic.

There are no legit studies showing that widespread voter fraud is an issue. Every study ever done on the subject finds less than 1% of votes are a problem, normally way less than 1%.

I cherish the right to vote more than you do, which is why I will fight against right wing zealots such as yourself that wants to keep people from voting unless they vote your way.

No fraudulent votes go my way, as nobody is going to cheat to vote for Gary Johnson or Michael Badnarik.

The Heritage foundation database is the best evidence against widespread voter fraud there is.

Two decades worth of data. How many votes do you suppose have been cast in the last 2 decades in the US? Lets low ball it and say that in that time there have been a half billion votes cast in that time. And the database has 1,107 proven cases of voter fraud.

So, 1107 out of a half a billion.

And for that you want to risk people incorrectly being barred from voting. Admit, you only want people who will vote for the GOP to vote, and nobody else.

Now you’re just making up numbers.

 

[Syriusly]

Once again, even one fraudulent vote is too many. 100,000 in just one county alone!
It can change an election. But of that, you do not care.
And for those they were able to document, how many others were not? Let’s say 100 for every one. That would be 60,000 fraudulent votes in a federal election. Enough, if in the right areas, to change the outcome. How many roadblocks are constantly thrown out there by lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to even verify if someone registered is legal or not?
You do understand the difficultly in verifying a vote, that is anonymous, to begin with, is? Correct?

The constant whining from the left regarding voting with id, the roadblocks and lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to verify, is enough to make anyone that values their vote, left or right, to become suspect.

Bull. And once again you show you care not for anyone else’s vote but your sides. Even one illegitimate vote is too many. Ever heard of Adlai Stevenson?


Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A
Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A grand jury later determined that Adlai Stevenson had unwittingly benefited from some 100,000 illegal ballots that had been cast in Chicago in the 1982 gubernatorial election. U.S. to probe primary vote fraud, Chicago Tribune, March 11, 1987.

Adlai Ewing Stevenson, III - Genealogy


Voter Fraud Database Tops 1,000 Proven Cases

Democrat Leaders, Al Sharpton Give Heroes Welcome To Woman Convicted Of Multiple Counts Of Voter Fraud

Indeed, recent elections bear this out. In 2015, a city council election in the New Jersey town of Perth Amboy was decided by a mere 10 votes. A judge overturned the election and ordered a new one after it was revealed that at least 13 illegal absentee ballots had been cast. The 2003 mayoral primary in East Chicago, Indiana, was overturned by the state Supreme Court after evidence of widespread fraud was revealed. The new election resulted in a different winner. Numerous convictions for election fraud resulted from this election, and are documented in The Heritage Foundation’s Voter Fraud Database.

It has been a thorn in my side for years, as well as others. There are studies showing it is a problem. Those same studies are poopooed by the Dems for one reason and one reason only.
It’s sad you don’t cherish your vote. Though, you don’t have to worry, since most illegal votes go your way. Well, I care. Why vote, if you can’t be assured some illegal vote is not going to wipe yours out, as a legitimate citizen single vote? I’ll be damned if we give up on making sure all votes are legitimate. Otherwise we are no better than a banana republic.

There are no legit studies showing that widespread voter fraud is an issue. Every study ever done on the subject finds less than 1% of votes are a problem, normally way less than 1%.

I cherish the right to vote more than you do, which is why I will fight against right wing zealots such as yourself that wants to keep people from voting unless they vote your way.

No fraudulent votes go my way, as nobody is going to cheat to vote for Gary Johnson or Michael Badnarik.

The Heritage foundation database is the best evidence against widespread voter fraud there is.

Two decades worth of data. How many votes do you suppose have been cast in the last 2 decades in the US? Lets low ball it and say that in that time there have been a half billion votes cast in that time. And the database has 1,107 proven cases of voter fraud.

So, 1107 out of a half a billion.

And for that you want to risk people incorrectly being barred from voting. Admit, you only want people who will vote for the GOP to vote, and nobody else.

Now you’re just making up numbers.

Now? LOL......you could copy and paste that response for most of his posts.

 

[depotoo]

When 83 ballots have been ordered for one address, yes there is.
Possible Voter Fraud Being Investigated in San Pedro After 83 Ballots Mysteriously Delivered to One Woman’s Apartment
Texas Senate panel targets mail-in ballot fraud after high-profile case
Nursing home resident's son: 'That's voter fraud'

There are many more.

Wait, aren't the progressives always claiming there is no voter fraud?

Yes, and we still claim that. What the hell is your point?

Voter Fraud is done by mail. So if a family member dies, you can put them in the ground and not notify anyone.

And you just keep voting for them.


There are no laws that prohibit home burial, but you must check local zoning laws before establishing a home cemetery or burying on private land.

• Alabama
• Alaska
• Arizona
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Florida
• Georgia
• Hawaii
• Idaho
• Iowa
• Kansas
• Kentucky
• Louisiana
• Maine
• Massachusetts
• Minnesota
• Mississippi
• Missouri
• Montana
• Nebraska
• Nevada
• New Hampshire
• New Mexico
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Ohio
• Oklahoma
• Oregon
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• Texas
• Utah
• Vermont
• Virginia
• West Virginia
• Wisconsin
• Wyoming

Btw: When people ask where is someone, they say they moved away.

As I recall down to Mexico where it cheaper to live. Just can’t recall the town name. Sorry.

btw2: MOST Red States are way below the average death per 100K rate by 60%.
******'s never die in red states. Yep, you got it. ****** can be put in the ground at your home. Colors get NO zoning clearances in ****** controlled states, to do the same, so they have to report their dead. That's how they keep their ****** districts floating. And the Colored districts under control and fewer.

Certainly vote by mail lends itself to voter fraud more than in person voting. But I don't know of any evidence to support any significant voter fraud by mail either.

 

[depotoo]

Making up numbers. Lol. Right.

10 Elections Decided by One Vote (Or Less)

Once again, even one fraudulent vote is too many. 100,000 in just one county alone!
It can change an election. But of that, you do not care.
And for those they were able to document, how many others were not? Let’s say 100 for every one. That would be 60,000 fraudulent votes in a federal election. Enough, if in the right areas, to change the outcome. How many roadblocks are constantly thrown out there by lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to even verify if someone registered is legal or not?
You do understand the difficultly in verifying a vote, that is anonymous, to begin with, is? Correct?

The constant whining from the left regarding voting with id, the roadblocks and lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to verify, is enough to make anyone that values their vote, left or right, to become suspect.

Bull. And once again you show you care not for anyone else’s vote but your sides. Even one illegitimate vote is too many. Ever heard of Adlai Stevenson?


Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A
Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A grand jury later determined that Adlai Stevenson had unwittingly benefited from some 100,000 illegal ballots that had been cast in Chicago in the 1982 gubernatorial election. U.S. to probe primary vote fraud, Chicago Tribune, March 11, 1987.

Adlai Ewing Stevenson, III - Genealogy


Voter Fraud Database Tops 1,000 Proven Cases

Democrat Leaders, Al Sharpton Give Heroes Welcome To Woman Convicted Of Multiple Counts Of Voter Fraud

Indeed, recent elections bear this out. In 2015, a city council election in the New Jersey town of Perth Amboy was decided by a mere 10 votes. A judge overturned the election and ordered a new one after it was revealed that at least 13 illegal absentee ballots had been cast. The 2003 mayoral primary in East Chicago, Indiana, was overturned by the state Supreme Court after evidence of widespread fraud was revealed. The new election resulted in a different winner. Numerous convictions for election fraud resulted from this election, and are documented in The Heritage Foundation’s Voter Fraud Database.

It has been a thorn in my side for years, as well as others. There are studies showing it is a problem. Those same studies are poopooed by the Dems for one reason and one reason only.
It’s sad you don’t cherish your vote. Though, you don’t have to worry, since most illegal votes go your way. Well, I care. Why vote, if you can’t be assured some illegal vote is not going to wipe yours out, as a legitimate citizen single vote? I’ll be damned if we give up on making sure all votes are legitimate. Otherwise we are no better than a banana republic.

There are no legit studies showing that widespread voter fraud is an issue. Every study ever done on the subject finds less than 1% of votes are a problem, normally way less than 1%.

I cherish the right to vote more than you do, which is why I will fight against right wing zealots such as yourself that wants to keep people from voting unless they vote your way.

No fraudulent votes go my way, as nobody is going to cheat to vote for Gary Johnson or Michael Badnarik.

The Heritage foundation database is the best evidence against widespread voter fraud there is.

Two decades worth of data. How many votes do you suppose have been cast in the last 2 decades in the US? Lets low ball it and say that in that time there have been a half billion votes cast in that time. And the database has 1,107 proven cases of voter fraud.

So, 1107 out of a half a billion.

And for that you want to risk people incorrectly being barred from voting. Admit, you only want people who will vote for the GOP to vote, and nobody else.

Now you’re just making up numbers.

 

[Syriusly]

When 83 ballots have been ordered for one address, yes there is.
Possible Voter Fraud Being Investigated in San Pedro After 83 Ballots Mysteriously Delivered to One Woman’s Apartment
Texas Senate panel targets mail-in ballot fraud after high-profile case
Nursing home resident's son: 'That's voter fraud'

There are many more.

Wait, aren't the progressives always claiming there is no voter fraud?

Yes, and we still claim that. What the hell is your point?

Voter Fraud is done by mail. So if a family member dies, you can put them in the ground and not notify anyone.

And you just keep voting for them.


There are no laws that prohibit home burial, but you must check local zoning laws before establishing a home cemetery or burying on private land.

• Alabama
• Alaska
• Arizona
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Florida
• Georgia
• Hawaii
• Idaho
• Iowa
• Kansas
• Kentucky
• Louisiana
• Maine
• Massachusetts
• Minnesota
• Mississippi
• Missouri
• Montana
• Nebraska
• Nevada
• New Hampshire
• New Mexico
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Ohio
• Oklahoma
• Oregon
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• Texas
• Utah
• Vermont
• Virginia
• West Virginia
• Wisconsin
• Wyoming

Btw: When people ask where is someone, they say they moved away.

As I recall down to Mexico where it cheaper to live. Just can’t recall the town name. Sorry.

btw2: MOST Red States are way below the average death per 100K rate by 60%.
******'s never die in red states. Yep, you got it. ****** can be put in the ground at your home. Colors get NO zoning clearances in ****** controlled states, to do the same, so they have to report their dead. That's how they keep their ****** districts floating. And the Colored districts under control and fewer.

Certainly vote by mail lends itself to voter fraud more than in person voting. But I don't know of any evidence to support any significant voter fraud by mail either.

So how many fraudulent votes were cast from there?

 

[depotoo]

Actually, from the first one, none, because they called the cops, but from the others there were several.

When 83 ballots have been ordered for one address, yes there is.
Possible Voter Fraud Being Investigated in San Pedro After 83 Ballots Mysteriously Delivered to One Woman’s Apartment
Texas Senate panel targets mail-in ballot fraud after high-profile case
Nursing home resident's son: 'That's voter fraud'

There are many more.

Wait, aren't the progressives always claiming there is no voter fraud?

Yes, and we still claim that. What the hell is your point?

Voter Fraud is done by mail. So if a family member dies, you can put them in the ground and not notify anyone.

And you just keep voting for them.


There are no laws that prohibit home burial, but you must check local zoning laws before establishing a home cemetery or burying on private land.

• Alabama
• Alaska
• Arizona
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Florida
• Georgia
• Hawaii
• Idaho
• Iowa
• Kansas
• Kentucky
• Louisiana
• Maine
• Massachusetts
• Minnesota
• Mississippi
• Missouri
• Montana
• Nebraska
• Nevada
• New Hampshire
• New Mexico
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Ohio
• Oklahoma
• Oregon
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• Texas
• Utah
• Vermont
• Virginia
• West Virginia
• Wisconsin
• Wyoming

Btw: When people ask where is someone, they say they moved away.

As I recall down to Mexico where it cheaper to live. Just can’t recall the town name. Sorry.

btw2: MOST Red States are way below the average death per 100K rate by 60%.
******'s never die in red states. Yep, you got it. ****** can be put in the ground at your home. Colors get NO zoning clearances in ****** controlled states, to do the same, so they have to report their dead. That's how they keep their ****** districts floating. And the Colored districts under control and fewer.

Certainly vote by mail lends itself to voter fraud more than in person voting. But I don't know of any evidence to support any significant voter fraud by mail either.

So how many fraudulent votes were cast from there?

 

[g5000]

Too bad your article doesn’t say how many actually voted illegally.

Hey, just make up a number. Trump did.

 

[Faun]

Making up numbers. Lol. Right.

10 Elections Decided by One Vote (Or Less)

Once again, even one fraudulent vote is too many. 100,000 in just one county alone!
It can change an election. But of that, you do not care.
And for those they were able to document, how many others were not? Let’s say 100 for every one. That would be 60,000 fraudulent votes in a federal election. Enough, if in the right areas, to change the outcome. How many roadblocks are constantly thrown out there by lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to even verify if someone registered is legal or not?
You do understand the difficultly in verifying a vote, that is anonymous, to begin with, is? Correct?

The constant whining from the left regarding voting with id, the roadblocks and lawsuits to keep anyone from being able to verify, is enough to make anyone that values their vote, left or right, to become suspect.

Bull. And once again you show you care not for anyone else’s vote but your sides. Even one illegitimate vote is too many. Ever heard of Adlai Stevenson?


Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A
Stevenson ran for Governor of Illinois in 1982 and 1986, losing both elections to James R. Thompson. In 1982 the initial vote count showed Stevenson winning; however, the final official count showed him losing by 1/7 of one percent. Stevenson promptly petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court for a recount and presented evidence of widespread election irregularities, including evidence of a failed punch card system for tabulation of votes (later to become infamous in the presidential election of 2000). Three days before the gubernatorial inauguration, the Court, by a one vote margin, denied the recount, asserting that the Illinois recount statute was unconstitutional.

However, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit, and did so in a curious way. Instead of following the normal standard that decides a motion to dismiss, the court did not assume, for purposes of the motion, that the facts stated in the complaint were true. Instead, the court went "behind the pleadings" to look at the conduct of the original partial recount and then dismissed the case because it said that Adlai Stevenson had no reasonable cause to complain about the conduct of the counting and recounting activities. A grand jury later determined that Adlai Stevenson had unwittingly benefited from some 100,000 illegal ballots that had been cast in Chicago in the 1982 gubernatorial election. U.S. to probe primary vote fraud, Chicago Tribune, March 11, 1987.

Adlai Ewing Stevenson, III - Genealogy


Voter Fraud Database Tops 1,000 Proven Cases

Democrat Leaders, Al Sharpton Give Heroes Welcome To Woman Convicted Of Multiple Counts Of Voter Fraud

Indeed, recent elections bear this out. In 2015, a city council election in the New Jersey town of Perth Amboy was decided by a mere 10 votes. A judge overturned the election and ordered a new one after it was revealed that at least 13 illegal absentee ballots had been cast. The 2003 mayoral primary in East Chicago, Indiana, was overturned by the state Supreme Court after evidence of widespread fraud was revealed. The new election resulted in a different winner. Numerous convictions for election fraud resulted from this election, and are documented in The Heritage Foundation’s Voter Fraud Database.

There are no legit studies showing that widespread voter fraud is an issue. Every study ever done on the subject finds less than 1% of votes are a problem, normally way less than 1%.

I cherish the right to vote more than you do, which is why I will fight against right wing zealots such as yourself that wants to keep people from voting unless they vote your way.

No fraudulent votes go my way, as nobody is going to cheat to vote for Gary Johnson or Michael Badnarik.

The Heritage foundation database is the best evidence against widespread voter fraud there is.

Two decades worth of data. How many votes do you suppose have been cast in the last 2 decades in the US? Lets low ball it and say that in that time there have been a half billion votes cast in that time. And the database has 1,107 proven cases of voter fraud.

So, 1107 out of a half a billion.

And for that you want to risk people incorrectly being barred from voting. Admit, you only want people who will vote for the GOP to vote, and nobody else.

Now you’re just making up numbers.

Moron, you made up the number of 60,000 illegal votes in a federal election.

 

[g5000]

Five million Mexicans registered to vote in California, completely undetected!

Five million Mexicans lined up to vote in California on Election Day, completely undetected!

We should use this genius army of stealth Mexicans to sneak into North Korea and dismantle their nukular weapons program!