What are the enemies of democracy?

Speaking of JFK... He won the election via voter fraud in the Daley machine in Chicago.
Then he was assassinated, and Johnson took over and got 50,000 of my generation killed for nothing.
Voter fraud has consequences.

 

I reject all claims not substantiated. See, if you are referring to historical facts, I need to know if you are interpreting facts correctly.

Therefore, the onus is on you to present the historical facts, not just your claim as to what they are.

 

How much fraud was detected in 2020 and confirmed in a court of law based on forensic analysis?

And, was that fraud anywhere near the ballpark of a number sufficient to alter the outcome of an election?

I mean, if we had .00005% fraud during prior years, and .00008% fraud during covid, that IS math, but I'm not impressed.

So, what is the hard, verifiable, data?

 

So, you are whining because a few more people, who didn't have easy access to the ballot box, at the last minute, due to COVID were given more time to vote?

is that your complaint? This is the big ****ing 'dems stole the election' sin republicans have been whining about?

Is that it?

Did any judge throw out a vote because of it?

No.

 

It took over half a century to prove that LBJ stole his US Senate election. We should have a thorough special counsel investigation into the 2020 election in which there are no time tables, funded by the government, and looks for any criminality. You all decided to muddy up the election process with an astronomical implementation of mail-in balloting, which does cause more voter fraud. That's a fact. If the election were conducted like the 2016 election, then I would not be questioning the 2020 election. But it wasn't. Not by a long shot. But I cannot say the same for Democrats. If Trump won again, you all would be claiming that Russia stole it for him again, and you all would be calling Robert Mueller III (make sure you use the "the third," for he's Mr. Integrity) to do another multi-year, multi-million-dollar investigation funded by Joe Public. How do I know that? Because you all have been questioning the presidential election since 2000 when it does not go your way.

 

There is a mountain of difference between absentee balloting as practiced in the U.S for decades, and wide-spread universal mail-in balloting as recently (2019) actively championed by Democrats. One is highly restricted, requires requests and authorizations and validations (with the degrees varying slightly among states). The other has no limits or controls or validation and is prima facie naturally more conducive and susceptible to fraud and abuse. The terms have been conflated because "absentee" has a much better and acceptable ring to it; <Mod Edit>

 

It ain't my yob to prove to you that the sun rises in the east. If I assert such and you reject it, well, reject away to your heart's content; I couldn't care less. Besides all information and even links to the 1960 election fraud have long since been scrubbed I'm sure.

 

I'm not whining in the least. I'm stating easy observational facts, which, for one, is that a judge has no constitutional authority whatsoever to unilaterally change any election general procedures whatever his highfalutin thinking and desires (or political leanings) might be.

Note that the Trump team filed a suit in PA state court asserting the Supreme Court ruled unconditionally. Their suit made it up to the PA Supreme Court which ruled (DUH!!) that they did not err and rejected the suit.

 

You've proved you don't know anything about Robert Reich except what you may have read or heard at extreme right wing media sites. He was a Rhodes Scholar which in and of itself is a rare honor. Becoming Secretary of Labor is an accomplishment achieved by few. Here is an incomplete resume:

You may not like Robert Reich, for political reasons BUT, any reasonable person has to admit those are impressive credentials; far beyond being a "talking head"; he's consistently been the canary in the coal mine for the interests of "everyday/work-a-day AmeriCANs. "Hatemongering" isn't an attribute fairly applied to him. I've listened to many of his presentations and read some of his writings and find him to be a thoughtful and fair patriot that is primarily concerned for the well being of America and AmeriCANs.

 

That is exactly what they are doing in California as of Jan 1.
Elections are over. It’s all about the ballot harvesting of unclaimed and stolen ballots.

 

The MIT research concluded that: "As with all forms of voter fraud, documented instances of fraud related to VBM are rare. However, even many scholars who argue that fraud is generally rare agree that fraud with VBM voting seems to be more frequent than with in-person voting."

They didn't define "rare" or "more frequent", but that it is known means that fraud is rarely successful and the total fraud in an election isn't anything close to numbers that would change the outcome of an election.

The Denver Channel 4 investigation turned up 78 cases of fraud in 2016. That's 78 in 2,685,475 votes or < 3 millionth's of a percent.

Which puts you and most conservatives in the jousting at windmills category.

But what mail-in voting does is turn out more voters (the real reason conservatives oppose it), not by much as the MIT article suggest ... 8% ... more or less. But that IS an election changing number. And, from personal experience (I'm a Coloradan) it allows voters to make more informed decisions. Voting from your dinning room table, at your leisure, with all the research you've done right in front of you allows more thoughtful voting, as opposed to waiting in line to get in a little booth with little or no research, in a hurry because of the people waiting in the line you were just in.

 

You make a claim like that, you provide evidence, or be dismissed,

Your choice.

 

Incompetent rebuttal; vacuous rhetoric.

to the ignore function you go.

 

The only way mail in ballots will work is by ”Opting - In” which doesn’t work well because people have to get off the couch and mail it. It just sits around getting coffee stains. Then they gave to be even more motivated and find a way to vote in

So the democrats want them mailed to anyone who is not listed by the bureaucracy as “dead, moved, or otherwise ineligible”.

These unmarked ballots received by uninterested voters are what are harvested and filled out.

Democrats want ease of use to trump election security.
How would you feel if vote fraud brought you a President Harris?

 

I guess I have to chalk this up to generational differences. Many of the points you make are I guess impressive to a certain of people or perhaps those of a certain age. Maybe it's more akin to being impressed by brand names as another example.

For example many people, especially people that are climbing certain ladders of power all seem to go to Ivy League schools. They take the mere act of having gone to it, even for something as basic as an undergrad degree and wave it around like an accomplishment.

Why would I consider that an accomplishment? If someone goes to Harvard and gets a degree in basketweaving I'd treat it just like the basketweaving degree from any other college. The accomplishment is the degree, not the college.

Rhodes Scholars simply get the Rhodes Scholarship which is the oldest graduate scholarship in the world. Being the oldest and also being pursued by a certain type of person, it also has as a result of that self-selection criteria led to certain types of people getting it more often. It isn't just that heads of state were Rhodes Scholars, it is also that anyone who wants to be a head of state goes out for Rhodes Scholarship and then uses it to try to become a head of state.

That said....it's just a graduate degree. PERIOD.

After that you have wrote lots of a books, but mostly the same book over and over.

It's been covered. I'm not impressed. I never was impressed.

 

Robert Reich's cannot be compared to "basket weaving", but IF your goal is to demean someone any excuse is as good as another.

 

First off, before I begin my reply to the substance, please don't tell me that I have to deliver something or be dismissed or ignored. It's childish. Try acting like a grown-up. Be like Jeb!, and put your big boy pants on.

Now, as for my claim about how LBJ stole a US Senate seat, this has been richly documented. (1)

Are you, too, going to deny that LBJ stole a US Senate seat. If so, that will be something else that I can append to the fun fact. Right now, this is the fun fact.

If you are going to contend that LBJ did not, in fact, steal that US Senate seat, I'll go ahead and append this snippet of comedic gold to the fun fact.

1. https://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/11/us/how-johnson-won-election-he-d-lost.html

 

This suit?

The last active legal challenge to Pennsylvania’s presidential election results was tossed Saturday by the state’s highest court, which balked at a request from one of President Donald Trump’s top boosters in Congress to disenfranchise some 2.6 million voters by throwing out every ballot cast by mail.

In a unanimous decision, the justices declared that Rep. Mike Kelly (R., Butler) had waited too long to bring his lawsuit seeking to overturn the 2019 law that created no-excuse mail voting in the state for the first time, and they declared the remedy he sought too extreme.

Had Kelly and the suit’s seven other Republican plaintiffs been forthright in their concerns over the constitutionality of the mail-voting statute, the court found, they would have filed their legal challenge before the new law was used in a primary and general election and would not have waited only until after it had become apparent that their favored candidate had lost.
https://www.inquirer.com/news/penns...a-supreme-court-mail-in-ballots-20201128.html

 

Proven fraud is rare; fraud not so much. Proving fraud is extremely hard.

 

That's correct. What right does Texas have to challenge another state's election results? And so forth. Like I said, stupid.

There was no evidence of "widespread fraud" that would change the election results, not in any of the swing states where they were desperate enough to throw up any flag they could think of.

Trump's Big Lie keeps on going, doesn't it? It's incredible to me, the number of people who still believe he won the election, all evidence being to the contrary. Kind of pathetic, IMO.

 

And claiming fraud without proof is very easy.

 

Too true. For example, I didn't even know that Forrest Gump was based on a book. Usually the book is better, with one notable exception: Blade Runner was a far better movie that the crappy little novela on which it was based.

It's good that you teach the down side of fame.

 

American democracy as it operates is singular and weird.
It is one version of ‘democracy’ but by no means a good one.
There are incidentally no ideal democracies, but probably several versions better than the American one.

 

Your focus is very narrow here. See how easy it is to take something positive and turn it into nothing more than a political weapon to be used against you?

Bear in mind that the Democrats who, unlike the GOP, like it when everyone votes, were looking at states like Colorado and Oregon, which were already voting by mail with almost no attempts at fraud, and seeing how much greater the participation was with that system in place. It was a boon for people who lived in remote areas, disabled people, seniors who would have to make special arrangements to get to the polls, and those whose employers did not (for whatever reason) allow them to take time off to vote. And all you see is subterfuge. I find that sad.

 

To the best of my knowledge, yes, although you do not describe the part about the court extending the counting deadline and easing ID requirements. Incidentally, Trump's suit won at the District level.