And it's completely unnecessary.
And they remain unnecessary.
It would still be unnecessary.
Quite unnecessarily, so how about no.
Election results discussion thread (and sadly the inevitable aftermath)
- Thread starter Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)
- Start date
- Status
They've done studies on how many voters don't have adequate ID and might have trouble voting. Around 5-10% are estimated to lack government photo ID, for instance. They are disproportionately non-white, disproportionately poor, and disproportionately vote Democrat. The USA has long history of casual attitudes to the rights of the poor and non-whites, if you want to talk about distrust.
If the US or state governments wants to give everyone a free ID, without things like making them travel 50 miles and wait six hours, or having to supply a load of ID that they might not have just to get their voter ID, fine. But all too often they don't. Thus these are subtle but real impediments, all of which chop off a few voters. Democrat-leaning voters.
Then look at the vote margins in the last week's election. Just 1% denied the vote could have won Trump the election. There isn't a Republican politician and strategist in the country who won't be thinking about that.
After that, it comes back to evidence. If fraud is extremely minor, then what is the function of demanding voter ID, thus almost certainly preventing more eligible Americans voting than it saves in ineligible votes? How is that a net positive for democracy?
Isn't that assuming we know the true percentage of fraud? The point of fraud is to go undetected, isn't it?
Hey mate, just an fyi, but you don't get to ask "Did you read that?" and then make up a story that has nothing to do with the evidence provided.
Do you feel like actually engaging with the point or is rhetorical sidetracking your best attempt?
Fraud isn't extremely minor. It's seemingly insufficient to swing nation-wide elections, but that says nothing of state and local elections, and states are the ones implementing the laws. Part of the reason why the Democratic Party leadership seems so disconnected from what they claim to represent is literal centuries of defrauding their own primaries. The political machines of the early 20th century never truly died, the party giving Clinton the debate questions early isn't a new anomaly, and the people stealing elections don't need fraud in the general because the Democratic Party has a vice grip on the cities they run in. Election fraud is much like gerrymandering: it's not actually a tool to win major elections, it doesn't work at that scale, but it can defend the seats of specific individuals running the political machines.
To an extent, what you're complaining about here is also called "politics" - it is ubiquitous: not restricted to the Democratic Party in the USA, nor restricted to the USA in the wider world. Parties anywhere and everywhere control their candidates and attempt to ensure the "right" ones get nominated / elected. Likewise any constituency where the elections are not competitive tends to breed corruption and self-interest in the dominant party.
I totally get why you or anyone would be unhappy with internal party stitch-ups. But this won't be dealt with by voter IDs. Attacking the ease with which citizens vote is a strange way to punish parties for rigging internal processes.
The primaries would be far less important if the US had a system that wold properly support more than two parties.
Last edited:
If you consider addressing the content of your sources irrelevant, I consider your post irrelevent.
In other news, It looks like GOP solidarity on humoring Trump's conspiracy theories is starting to collapse, with multiple prominent GOP senators acknowledging Biden's win and several GOP senators calling for the transition, particularly intelligence sharing, to proceed while the (almost entirely baseless) disputes are being resolved.
www.cnn.com
www.cnn.com
Meanwhile, the Trump campaign has dropped their legal challenges in Arizona as it relates to the presidential election.
www.cnn.com
And the election law firm representing the Trump Campaign in its Pennsylvania lawsuit has moved to no longer represent the campaign in court.
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/pmn/Q7WQUFINEFCRNDJ42TGV2BGMTA.jpg)
www.inquirer.com
In non-presidential news, Martha McSally has conceded to Mark Kelly in the Arizona Senate Race.
Analysis: President Trump's GOP wall of support is cracking
As President Donald Trump's lawyers cling to their far-fetched schemes to overturn the presidential election, it was increasingly clear Thursday that cracks are forming in Trump's GOP wall of support, as more Republicans stepped forward to say that President-elect Joe Biden should receive...
www.cnn.com
These Republicans are publicly recognizing Biden's legitimacy as President-elect
A growing number of notable Republicans are beginning to recognize Joe Biden as President-elect, even as President Donald Trump and many GOP leaders are still refusing to do so.
www.cnn.com
Meanwhile, the Trump campaign has dropped their legal challenges in Arizona as it relates to the presidential election.
Trump campaign drops Arizona lawsuit requesting review of ballots | CNN Politics
Lawyers for the Trump campaign have dropped a lawsuit seeking a review of all ballots cast on Election Day after finding that the margin of victory for the presidential contest in Arizona could not be overcome.
www.cnn.com
And the election law firm representing the Trump Campaign in its Pennsylvania lawsuit has moved to no longer represent the campaign in court.
Trump team persists in Pa. court fights despite COVID quarantine, quitting lawyers, and courtroom losses
A day of setbacks in and out of court left the president's legal strategy to reverse the results teetering on the edge of collapse.
www.inquirer.com
In non-presidential news, Martha McSally has conceded to Mark Kelly in the Arizona Senate Race.
Arizona election updates: All votes counted in Maricopa County
Arizona enters its eleventh day of postelection waiting. Follow The Arizona Republic's updates for Friday, Nov. 13.
www.azcentral.com
Wait, you really consider this 4chan rant to be addressing the contents of the lawsuits Republicans have lost for active and explicit racism in their lawmaking?
Your reading comprehension can't honestly be this poor.
Have we already covered the latest in the Richard Hopkins saga? The poll-worker from Erie, PA who claimed he witnessed ballot fraud. Remember, investigators reported that he had recanted, and then the following day Hopkins claimed he had not recanted, and that he would provide more information the next day.
Well, that extra information turned out to be a recording of his interview with investigators, which was released via Project Veritas.
And... the recording has him explicitly saying that he "didn't hear the whole story", and "filled in the blanks". He's on tape, on a recording that he provided, saying his own allegation was speculation. Interviewers encourage him to strip back the story to only the facts he actually witnessed, and... there's nothing there.
Its available to listen to yourselves.
Well, that extra information turned out to be a recording of his interview with investigators, which was released via Project Veritas.
And... the recording has him explicitly saying that he "didn't hear the whole story", and "filled in the blanks". He's on tape, on a recording that he provided, saying his own allegation was speculation. Interviewers encourage him to strip back the story to only the facts he actually witnessed, and... there's nothing there.
Its available to listen to yourselves.
Their quandary is prettymuch that they would like Trumop's supporters for the Georgia Senate runoff, if nothing else.
But at the same, Trump attacking the election as illegitimate is potentially undermining all the GOP victories on other parts of the ticket as well.
Add in that some of the fraud that has been picked up has been GOp voters anyways, and that Georgia already partially rejected Trump, so its arguable how well his base helps you there.
And yeah, thats probably going to make them start backpedaling.
It seems that there might be a reason for the Arizona lawsuit to have been dropped. Apparently, the election witness admitted in court to having been a business partner of the lawyer representing Trump's case. Specifically, they are listed as co-owners of Phoenix-based software company Signafide on said company's website.
Yeah, that just screams conflict of interest. Dropping the lawsuit was basically the best option to not get reamed by a judge.
www.newsweek.com
Yeah, that just screams conflict of interest. Dropping the lawsuit was basically the best option to not get reamed by a judge.
Arizona Election Witness Admits to Being Trump Campaign Lawyer's Associate
Zack Alcyone admitted to being the associate of the Trump campaign's legal representative, Kory Langhofer, during a hearing in Maricopa County on Thursday.
www.newsweek.com
That is true. Its also really hard to make any recommendations, assumptions or criticism.
There's is also the fraud of the legal kind. Eg. Some people think gerrymandering is fraud
I can't help but notice as well that several law firms representing Trump's cases have been withdrawing their participation. I might speculate that the money isn't worth their embarrassment.
But again, I don't think this is about seriously challenging the election. Remember back in the Obama presidency, when McConnell said his aim was to make Obama a one-term president? Nothing's changed. The aim here is a long-term strategy, to delegitimise Biden and strengthen the case for sheer obstructionism. The second is to undermine trust in the electoral system in order to push through reforms that will disadvantage Democratic voters.
* * *
There is potentially a third aim.
As media has noticed in the fine print of these funding requests being blasted at Republicans, in fact huge sums of the money requested are not going to fight the election count as they advertise. In Trump's fund request, half is paying off his 2020 campaign debt. Trump's campaign was... maybe not well managed. It pulled in only modest sums of money, spent like crazy (it was almost bare by mid-October) and ended up with a sizeable debt.
For the joint Trump/Republican fund request, 40% is going into general Republican Party coffers (up to a max. $15000), and 60% to a PAC (up to a max. $5000) - only the excess goes to the recount fund. So donate $10,000 to the latter, it's $5000 to the PAC, $1000 to the recount, and $4000 to the Republican Party. You'd need to donate over $8000 just to get anything to the recount fund.
Just so we all know where the priorities lie.
So what is this PAC? It's called "Save America", and it's founded by Trump himself. It's pretty much a personal slush fund or retirement package, isn't it? These funds can have very generous use of expenses, and we all know how effective Trump is at manipulating expenses. Maybe Donald can ask Ivanka what suit he should buy, and she can claim $50k as an image consultant. Host big shindigs costing millions at his own venues. Of course he'll do this. He's always done it. I wonder whether it can be funnelled into his business ventures in other ways - like, if he going to start a TV news channel, can this PAC pay for some of it, even indirectly?
I'm here to remind you again that for all the allegations of systemic Democratic ballot fraud, the GOP was *literally* caught stealing a Congressional election in North Carolina just two years ago, and it was so egregious that the election had to be nullified and reheld at a later date.
How Republicans Tried to Rig an Election in North Carolina (And Almost Got Away With It)
It’s been nine months, and the district still doesn’t have a congressional representative. But voters head to the polls again soon.
- Status