The Election Was Rigged to Quash America First Patriots and “MAGA Republicans”

[TheCount]

are you talking about Trump, Minnesota Pillow or Alex Jones? LOL

The end of the OP

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

Election Deniers are losers.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Lol - EVERY election is rigged. If voting changed anything, they wouldn't let us do it.

The people in charge of the institutions of power will ALWAYS craft systems to ensure that power is retained. It's just a matter of how each state crafts their system.

In many red states, they've bought into the premise that voting must be secure and voting window limited. That advantages Republicans... because they wrote the rules.
Conversely, in blue states, they've bought into the premise that voting must be accessible and open, making it as easy as possible for people to vote. That advantages Democrats... because they wrote those rules.

During Covid, many states changed their rules through executive action based on the second premise. And the advantages followed. Most of those rules have not been rolled back.

It's not who votes. It's not who counts the votes. It's who created the system for voting.

I'm old enough to remember when you had to vote on a certain day (and we had to show a picture ID), with a paper ballot and they were manually counted.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Election Deniers are losers.

Yes, it's preferable to just accept the results like some braindead idiot, when ballots are mass-mailed, with no ID required, etc., etc., etc.

 

[pcosmar]

I'm old enough to remember when you had to vote on a certain day (and we had to show a picture ID), with a paper ballot and they were manually counted.

And the results were known before Midnight.

 

[acptulsa]

 

[susano]

Election Deniers are losers.

Holocaust deniers
Climate deniers
COVID deniers
Election deniers

Anti Semites!

 

[Philhelm]

In many red states, they've bought into the premise that voting must be secure and voting window limited. That advantages Republicans... because they wrote the rules.

I don't think this is a good example, since secure and timely elections should be the default to curb potential election fraud.

 

[Philhelm]

Election Deniers are losers.

I suppose if an election was stolen via fraud, I would argue that an election did not in fact occur.

 

[pcosmar]

and Who says Torture doesn't work?

 

[Occam's Banana]

In many red states, they've bought into the premise that voting must be secure and voting window limited. That advantages Republicans... because they wrote the rules.

I don't think this is a good example, since secure and timely elections should be the default to curb potential election fraud.

The statements
(1) "voting [being] secure and [the] voting window [being] limited advantages Republicans", and
(2) "secure and timely elections should be the default to curb potential election fraud"
are not mutually exclusive.

They could both be true - and if they are, then (1) would explain Republicans' support for (2).

(That would certainly be a better or more realistic explanation than "Republicans are just noble-minded defenders of the sanctity of voting and democracy - and let the chips fall where they may".)

 

[showpan]

We know how they are cheating. They are padding votes with empty houses, empty lots, PO boxes, businesses, people who have moved out of state, dead people. That's how they add to the voter rolls and pad the early mail ins. Then on election day, after the polls close, they know exactly how many votes they need and look on their voter lists for everyone who has not voted. Then they simply vote for them...for the win. Those are the truckloads of mail in ballot dumps after each county has reported. The machines are also suspect because votes are being flipped. When they release the numbers one night and the next morning it has gone down, they were flipped, it's that simple....lol

They know that the only way to catch them is to do a hand count and match sigs by a third party, they cannot be trusted to do that...lol....they already proved they can't.

One thing we can do now before the next election is purge their rolls. This throws a very big wrench into their scam. We need to verify EVERY registered voter to make sure they actually live there and are not dead. That means an army of people willing to physically go look up addresses to see if there is even a house at that location. They have torn down 10's of thousands of houses since the Obama blight program. Google earth can be used too although it's not up to date in a lot of areas. Judicial watch found almost 25,000 people on Michigan's "partial" list after they were sued to see it. Then they refused to take them off. Thousands of dead people and around 20k that no longer lived there. That was just a simple search on a partial list. A more thorough search would no doubt produce many more. A lot of states have enabled someone to hide the address of their registration so most of the early mail ins are untraceable to the public eye. That is why we need to start suing them for the FULL lists now so we can purge them before another election. Purge the voter rolls and it will be much harder to fabricate enough votes for the win after election day. There are organizations that are getting ready to join forces and begin this process. Everyone should get involved before it's too late. Even :safe" states like Indiana where I am is no longer safe. They are slowly cooking the books. The Republic is at stake here.

 

[pcosmar]

The statements
(1) "voting [being] secure and [the] voting window [being] limited advantages Republicans", and
(2) "secure and timely elections should be the default to curb potential election fraud"
are not mutually exclusive.

They could both be true - and if they are, then (1) would explain Republicans' support for (2).

(That would certainly be a better or more realistic explanation than "Republicans are just noble-minded defenders of the sanctity of voting and democracy - and let the chips fall where they may".)

DUDE.
The "progressives" want Totalitarianism ..,, Nothing Less..

Most "R"s just want Fair.

 

[ClaytonB]

Most "R"s just want Fair.

This hasn't been true since the Patriot Act. So, no, Repugs are not the party of "fair" or opposing totalitarianism. They are the party who ushered in the current era of totalitarianism we are living in now. The Clintons tried and failed, not because the Repugs oppose totalitarianism on principle, they just oppose totalitarianism that they don't control. So, they blew up the Clinton conspiracy and substituted their own. Cue PNAC, the Patriot Act, NDAA, Military Commissions Act, and all the rest of the joyride we call "modern America."

When Trump was riding the wave, I was open to the possibility of a secret conspiracy to jailbreak the party from the grips of the evil neoCONs and their pets in the Repug party. But it's pretty clear that that wave crested back in 2020, and this was just another case of Lucy setting up Charlie Brown for another football kick. Y'all can keep falling for it if you want, but I'm done with it. Produce fruits or get out of the way and let those who will produce fruits come forward and lead. Those are the only options...

 

[A Son of Liberty]

What part of the state would you go...?

Probably somewhere near Cheyenne. Maybe Gillette.

My move isn't imminent, so I haven't investigated it too much yet.

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

I do not think cheating or stealing elections is anything new. There was probably election fraud in the first election. Saying it does not exist or doesn't exist to a degree to alter results is just as narrow minded as people in 2022 that think that the Government works for them.

 

[acptulsa]

 

[vita3]

Supreme Court’s conservative ruling against abortion was ill timed

It gave the Democratic side a tremendous rallying cry, when their party had nothing to show with Biden/Harris admin

 

[CaptUSA]

I don't think this is a good example, since secure and timely elections should be the default to curb potential election fraud.

Well, I agree, but you have to understand that you're already starting with that premise. And if that's your base premise, then your preferred election system will advantage Republicans.

But if you start with the premise that strict voting rules "suppress" some voters, and that voting should be made easier, then your preferred system would be just the opposite. You would require ID's to vote because some people may not have them. You'd allow same-day registration because some people are too lazy to be engaged in the process on multiple days. You'd like no excuse absentee voting. You'd want drop boxes or vote-by-mail. And you'd like to keep the process open for as long as possible. Obviously, these things can open the door to fraud, but even without fraud, this system advantages Democrats. Do all of those things, and you've secured the election for Democrats. But each one you do gives the Democrats an additional advantage. And remember, people who buy into this premise do not think that voter fraud is really an issue. Moreover, they believe that people who claim fraud are really just looking to suppress some people's right to vote.

While you'll never see the studies, you know the political parties have done the calculations on each one of those provisions to understand exactly what percentage of advantage they'll get. Maybe drop boxes give the D's a 3% advantage, while requiring an ID to vote gives the R's a 5% advantage... We don't really know the exact advantages, and they will vary by state. But the parties know.

Here's a handy chart: https://www.vote411.org/voting-rules

*ETA: I should also note that "how" each provision is implemented will also affect the advantage percentage. For example, a few centralized drop boxes under 24-hour surveillance that cannot be opened without dual party oversight will provide a lower advantage to D's than unguarded drop boxes on every corner.

 

[susano]

Well, I agree, but you have to understand that you're already starting with that premise. And if that's your base premise, then your preferred election system will advantage Republicans.

But if you start with the premise that strict voting rules "suppress" some voters, and that voting should be made easier, then your preferred system would be just the opposite. You would require ID's to vote because some people may not have them. You'd allow same-day registration because some people are too lazy to be engaged in the process on multiple days. You'd like no excuse absentee voting. You'd want drop boxes or vote-by-mail. And you'd like to keep the process open for as long as possible. Obviously, these things can open the door to fraud, but even without fraud, this system advantages Democrats. Do all of those things, and you've secured the election for Democrats. But each one you do gives the Democrats an additional advantage. And remember, people who buy into this premise do not think that voter fraud is really an issue. Moreover, they believe that people who claim fraud are really just looking to suppress some people's right to vote.

While you'll never see the studies, you know the political parties have done the calculations on each one of those provisions to understand exactly what percentage of advantage they'll get. Maybe drop boxes give the D's a 3% advantage, while requiring an ID to vote gives the R's a 5% advantage... We don't really know the exact advantages, and they will vary by state. But the parties know.

Here's a handy chart: https://www.vote411.org/voting-rules

*ETA: I should also note that "how" each provision is implemented will also affect the advantage percentage. For example, a few centralized drop boxes under 24-hour surveillance that cannot be opened without dual party oversight will provide a lower advantage to D's than unguarded drop boxes on every corner.

I don't understand the difference between absentee voting (w or w/o and "excuse) and mail in voting. Some states allow the former but not that latter. That list also doesn't have ballot harvesting which is a big advantage for the vote scammers.

As of May 2022:[1][2]

25 states and D.C. permitted someone chosen by the voter to return mail ballots on their behalf in most cases
11 states specified who may return ballots (i.e., household members, caregivers, and/or family members) in most cases
1 state explicitly allowed only the voter to return their ballot
13 states did not specify whether someone may return another's ballot

https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_harvesting_laws_by_state

Elections will not be anywhere near honest until we have:

paper ballots with no machine counting
clear, lucite boxes into which the completed ballots are deposited
votes are hand counted and recorded at the precinct level, on camera
voting is tied to citizenship
ID and signature verification is required