Author Topic: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.  (Read 594516 times)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19442
    • View Profile
Re: Biden stronger than Hillary was in WI
« Reply #1200 on: September 09, 2020, 06:37:53 AM »
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/biden-2020-looks-stronger-than-clinton-2016-in-wisconsin/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202020-09-08&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Biden, as he was, is a better fit for Wisconsin than Hillary.   Now this is a guy who answers questions with a teleprompter and has his wavering statements controlled by conflicted handlers.  Is this the Joe Biden who favored the violence or the one who opposes it?  Is this the one who wrote the crime bill or who is letting them out?  Is this Biden the moderate or the one who sides with Bernie Sanders and AOC on banning all fossil fuels, supporting Green New Deal and hating capitalism?  Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have 6 hours of debate time coming up to clarify (or muddle) how they would govern.

Wisconsin is a strange place politically. Madison is far Left.  Milwaukee has large city characteristics.  Most of the rest is beautiful countryside with small towns, that now lean right.   

Does anyone remember Sen Bill Proxmire and the Golden Fleece awards for most flagrant waste of taxpayer funds?  That fiscal conservative was a Democrat from Wisconsin, who made a trademark out of being a watchdog for the taxpayer.  Wisconsin elected and rejected Russ Feingold, as left as they come.  Wisconsin elected and reelected conservative governor Scott Walker, then voted him out.  Current Senators Ron Johnson and Tammy Baldwin are polar opposites elected in different years.  Anyone who says they know which way Wisconsin will go this year lies.  All sides agree, Wisconsin is in play. 

Hillary never went there to campaign in 2016.  Wisconsin was safely behind the Blue Wall, her handlers told her.  Biden and Harris both went there already - to honor a rapist.  What say these two about school choice?  Economic growth?  Energy prices?  The threat of China?  Is it all "social justice" and "Green New Deal"??  That is not where Joe Biden built his reputation as an old school Democrat.

WI Dem primary April 7, 2020:  Joe Biden  63%,  Bernie Sanders 32%, after the nomination was essentially clinched. 

Joe Biden has a needle to thread.  He needs the far Left consolidated and motivated and he also needs his steady, moderate image intact to win the middle.  But when he talks to the Left, he loses the middle. 

He needs to look ready to do the job during the next two months of exposure.  If yesterday is any indication, that is not possible.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2020, 06:56:28 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19442
    • View Profile
Electoral process, NYT: The Electoral College Will Destroy America
« Reply #1201 on: September 09, 2020, 07:50:48 AM »
Why not title it, NY Time hates the constitution?  Burn it up, go with mob rule.  The Founders were wrong.  Today's Left are SO much smarter.  Majority should rules.  Anyone can see that.  This is not a union of states - in the view of these wise men.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/08/opinion/electoral-college-trump-biden.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

"The Electoral College as it functions today is the most glaring reminder of many that our democracy is not fair, not equal and not representative."

   - It's not a democracy, it's a constitutional republic.

"No other advanced democracy in the world uses anything like it, and for good reason."

   - Please name those countries governed netter than the USA.

"The election, as Mr. Trump would say — though not for the right reasons — is rigged."

    - Yes.  Rigged very carefully by the constitution against oppressive rule by either the whim or the force of a simple majority.

Funny liberals loved it, owned it and named it, the Blue Wall, when it favored them.  Which means this is all about losing. 

How about instead following it instead of fighting it?  Unite us instead of divide us to win.  Construct a message that appeals to a majority of electoral votes represented by different people in different states in different regions with different economic, social and other needs and interests.

Odd that part of the author's argument

If wrong, all of this is easy to fix within the constitutional framework, if you believe in the constitution.  Simply pass your amendment with 2/3 vote of the House, 2/3 of the Senate and 3/4th of the state legislatures.

"get rid of statewide winner-take-all laws"??  Great.  Governor elections too?  Doesn't that too 'disenfranchise' those who voted for second place? Will a Rhode Island's Senate seat be listed as 60/40 Democrat then, or will they just seat the Democrat?  Oh he meant just for the Presidency and just for this time that the EC allegedly favors Republicans.  And it's all because of a projection from Nate Silver at 538, whose forecasts have  been right on exactly zero Presidential elections in a row.

Instead he argues that states should disenfranchise ALL of their own statewide votes and forfeit their state's electoral votes to the candidate who wins everywhere else.

THAT better exemplifies consent of the governed?  I don't think so.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
Now, why would the Dems do that?
« Reply #1203 on: September 11, 2020, 07:43:35 PM »

A Trump-Biden Niagara Fall
How the pandemic and protests are floating the U.S. into a political crisis.

By Daniel Henninger
Sept. 9, 2020 7:10 pm ET
WSJ Opinion: A Trump-Biden Niagara Fall

Wonder Land: How the pandemic and protests are floating the U.S. into a political crisis. Images: AFP/Getty Images Composite: Mark Kelly

Niagara Falls is a wonder of the world in part because when staring at its vast, churning expanse, what comes to mind is: I wouldn’t want to be swept over those falls. Welcome to the 2020 presidential election. Some 120 million voters are in the same boat, heading for a political crackup on Nov. 3. But hey, we don’t arrive at the top of the falls for two months. Why worry?

On Tuesday, this newspaper’s opinion columns carried a bracing editorial—“Will Courts Pick the Next President?”—on the impending mail-in voting fiasco. Read it and weep. The gist of the situation is that some states, oblivious to the laws of postal-delivery gravity, are allowing ballots to be put in the mail just days before Nov. 3. They may or may not show up by Election Day, but so what?

Postal service experts have warned of the risks of mailing ballots within seven days of Nov. 3. But hardly anyone is listening to them. Amid the maelstrom of state voting procedures, lawsuits are being filed to challenge existing deadlines. A federal judge told Georgia that if a ballot is postmarked before Election Day, it has to be counted whenever it shows up.

In Pennsylvania, some officials want ballots counted even if a postmark is missing. State election officials are going to eyeball signatures on mailed ballots to see if they match what’s on file. Close doesn’t count only in horseshoes and hand grenades.

Ohio’s League of (Democratic) Women Voters is already challenging the verification process. A long two months remain to throw other legal monkey wrenches into what’s left of the election system.

But here’s the really dynamite mail-in metric: Polling done by The Wall Street Journal suggests 66% of Trump voters plan to vote in person, but nearly 75% of Biden voters say they’ll mail it in. Arguably, we are going to have parallel elections for the same office. Not even close to arguable is that both Donald Trump and Joe Biden will claim each won his election. Dueling inaugurations, anyone? Portland’s permanent political street-fighting could be coming to a neighborhood near you.

The excuse for rolling the election helplessly onto the rocks is, of course . . . the pandemic.

It’s worth noting how much of essential America is being subsumed beneath the pandemic’s unchanging conventional wisdom.

Schools, universities, urban economies, industries and now a national election must stumble forward as if nothing we know about the virus’s virulence or transmission has changed since March. At institution after institution, leadership has ceded decision-making responsibility to an amorphous power called “science.” That statement requires an apology to the scientists who world-wide have been conducting debate and discussion about the virus’s threat today versus the need to resume normal human life.

Are we really going to allow a national political crisis caused by a demonstrably flawed voting system to just, you know, sort of happen? A half year on, the pandemic has short-circuited independent or helpful input from much of the nation’s leadership on protecting the election.

Several reasons may explain the national outbreak of nonfeasance.

One is “Trump.” After marinating for three years in antipathy for “Trump,” many elites—in business, academia and the media—are willing to let the system rip to get rid of him. In turn, he’s happy to oblige the rancor. In the Cold War, this was called mutual assured destruction.

More intriguing is how racial issues that emerged after May 25 have suppressed normal political instincts and comment. The idea of Black Lives Matter has become a kind of alternative reality in which racialism informs everything, starting with that long list of torn-down monuments to such notorious racists as Ulysses S. Grant.

This presidential election was going to be difficult enough without the new element of racially motivated mob rage and one major party locked up over its historic ties to the civil-rights movement and the current movement’s street protests and violence. The BLM goal is to conform opinion. The result is that people who normally would speak up no longer do—about anything.

Last month, Seattle’s Police Chief Carmen Best, a black woman, was forced to resign. This week, Rochester, N.Y., Police Chief La’Ron Singletary, also black, resigned with a bitter statement: “As a man of integrity, I will not sit idly by while outside entities attempt to destroy my character.”

Their careers, a testament to racial advancement, are collateral damage, tossed away in a day without defense from anyone. The complexities of their jobs aren’t discussable. Instead, liberals and many others—in and out of politics—hide behind the virtue of the moment, intimidated by social media and the social-justice sentiments of millennials.

Between the pandemic and protests, we have fallen into a culture of silence this year. Now it looks as if we will nonchalantly let the mail-in vote mess float a presidential election over the falls into a political crisis. Stock up on water wings.

Write henninger@wsj.com.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
WSJ Impending PA Fustercluck could be cured if only
« Reply #1204 on: September 12, 2020, 10:25:38 AM »
Pennsylvania has already suffered one interminable mail-vote delay in 2020, and a repeat in November could draw the entire country into a legal brawl, while putting the result of the presidential election into serious doubt. How about heading off this too-predictable debacle before it happens?

A week after the June 2 primary, about half the counties in the Keystone State were still tallying ballots. On June 11, Philadelphia alone had 42,255 votes uncounted. President Trump won Pennsylvania in 2016 by 44,292.


If Mr. Trump and Joe Biden run neck and neck in November, how long might Pennsylvania keep the Electoral College hanging? In the campaign’s closing weeks, arriving mail votes will pile up in local offices, but state law says they can’t be processed until 7 a.m. on Election Day. This wasn’t enough preparation to give timely results when 1.5 million residents voted absentee in June, and it won’t be in November.

Tight deadlines are another problem. Pennsylvanians can request a mail ballot as late as 5 p.m. on Oct. 27. For votes to count, they must arrive at local election offices by 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. That leaves seven days, including a Sunday, for applications to be handled, blank ballots delivered, and votes dropped off or return mailed. The U.S. Postal Service says such a turnaround is unrealistic and creates a high risk of tardiness. America’s first postmaster general, Ben Franklin, would be unhappy to see his Pennsylvania setting up the USPS for failure.


In some states, straggling ballots are valid if they’re postmarked by Election Day. Pennsylvania law has no similar provision, but Democrats are asking the state Supreme Court to conjure one. Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, wants to count votes arriving by Nov. 6. Pennsylvania also lacks a way for voters to fix ballots that are rejected for suspect signatures. This is a recipe for extended legal mischief and for judges to determine which votes are counted. With the state Supreme Court controlled by Democrats, that could be what Mr. Wolf has in mind.

The state Legislature, run by Republicans, is moving a bill with fixes. Under the House proposal, which passed 112-90 last week, the deadline to request mail ballots would jump to a comfortable 15 days before the election, as the USPS suggests. Absentee votes could be pre-processed beginning the Saturday before Nov. 3. Voters with suspect signatures would be given a chance to prove their identities.

Mr. Wolf plans to veto the bill “for a multitude of reasons,” his spokeswoman says. One objection is that it “seeks to eliminate the use of drop boxes.” True enough, although it would also authorize Pennsylvanians to drop off voted mail ballots at their polling places. Mr. Wolf wants a longer period of pre-processing for mail votes: three weeks, not three days.

The tragedy would be for Republicans to pass a bill, Mr. Wolf to veto it, and Pennsylvania to barrel toward a foreseeable crash. Maybe three days of pre-processing is too little, given the busyness of Nov. 1 and 2. Maybe three weeks is too much. Mr. Wolf’s office didn’t reply Thursday to a query on the potential for compromise. “We continue to be open to negotiations,” says a spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman, “and hope that the Governor would meet with Republican legislative leaders.”

The same should be happening beyond Harrisburg. About a dozen states, including Wisconsin and Michigan, don’t process ballots until Election Day. Minnesotans can request a mail ballot on Nov. 2. Smells like more lawsuits.

Some analysts in Washington are so alarmed about delayed presidential results that they’re calling to delay the date of the Electoral College vote, which can be changed with an act of Congress. Inauguration Day is fixed in the Constitution as Jan. 20.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio has a bill to bump the meeting of electors from Dec. 14 to Jan. 2. So Americans can spend Christmas wondering who their next President will be? There’s still time to avoid that outcome.

States shouldn’t be let off the hook. If Mr. Wolf and Pennsylvania’s legislators get together now to fix their shortsighted and potentially destructive election laws, and if other states follow, then with any luck Mr. Rubio’s bill will never be needed.

But on present trend, in a close presidential race, we are headed toward a vote-counting mess in which both sides claim victory. Don’t rule out furious supporters of the candidates battling in the street. If you think this isn’t possible in America, you haven’t been paying attention to this year’s “summer of love.”

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: WSJ Impending PA Fustercluck could be cured if only
« Reply #1205 on: September 12, 2020, 04:22:12 PM »
The fustercluck is part of the left's plan.



Pennsylvania has already suffered one interminable mail-vote delay in 2020, and a repeat in November could draw the entire country into a legal brawl, while putting the result of the presidential election into serious doubt. How about heading off this too-predictable debacle before it happens?

A week after the June 2 primary, about half the counties in the Keystone State were still tallying ballots. On June 11, Philadelphia alone had 42,255 votes uncounted. President Trump won Pennsylvania in 2016 by 44,292.


If Mr. Trump and Joe Biden run neck and neck in November, how long might Pennsylvania keep the Electoral College hanging? In the campaign’s closing weeks, arriving mail votes will pile up in local offices, but state law says they can’t be processed until 7 a.m. on Election Day. This wasn’t enough preparation to give timely results when 1.5 million residents voted absentee in June, and it won’t be in November.

Tight deadlines are another problem. Pennsylvanians can request a mail ballot as late as 5 p.m. on Oct. 27. For votes to count, they must arrive at local election offices by 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. That leaves seven days, including a Sunday, for applications to be handled, blank ballots delivered, and votes dropped off or return mailed. The U.S. Postal Service says such a turnaround is unrealistic and creates a high risk of tardiness. America’s first postmaster general, Ben Franklin, would be unhappy to see his Pennsylvania setting up the USPS for failure.


In some states, straggling ballots are valid if they’re postmarked by Election Day. Pennsylvania law has no similar provision, but Democrats are asking the state Supreme Court to conjure one. Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, wants to count votes arriving by Nov. 6. Pennsylvania also lacks a way for voters to fix ballots that are rejected for suspect signatures. This is a recipe for extended legal mischief and for judges to determine which votes are counted. With the state Supreme Court controlled by Democrats, that could be what Mr. Wolf has in mind.

The state Legislature, run by Republicans, is moving a bill with fixes. Under the House proposal, which passed 112-90 last week, the deadline to request mail ballots would jump to a comfortable 15 days before the election, as the USPS suggests. Absentee votes could be pre-processed beginning the Saturday before Nov. 3. Voters with suspect signatures would be given a chance to prove their identities.

Mr. Wolf plans to veto the bill “for a multitude of reasons,” his spokeswoman says. One objection is that it “seeks to eliminate the use of drop boxes.” True enough, although it would also authorize Pennsylvanians to drop off voted mail ballots at their polling places. Mr. Wolf wants a longer period of pre-processing for mail votes: three weeks, not three days.

The tragedy would be for Republicans to pass a bill, Mr. Wolf to veto it, and Pennsylvania to barrel toward a foreseeable crash. Maybe three days of pre-processing is too little, given the busyness of Nov. 1 and 2. Maybe three weeks is too much. Mr. Wolf’s office didn’t reply Thursday to a query on the potential for compromise. “We continue to be open to negotiations,” says a spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman, “and hope that the Governor would meet with Republican legislative leaders.”

The same should be happening beyond Harrisburg. About a dozen states, including Wisconsin and Michigan, don’t process ballots until Election Day. Minnesotans can request a mail ballot on Nov. 2. Smells like more lawsuits.

Some analysts in Washington are so alarmed about delayed presidential results that they’re calling to delay the date of the Electoral College vote, which can be changed with an act of Congress. Inauguration Day is fixed in the Constitution as Jan. 20.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio has a bill to bump the meeting of electors from Dec. 14 to Jan. 2. So Americans can spend Christmas wondering who their next President will be? There’s still time to avoid that outcome.

States shouldn’t be let off the hook. If Mr. Wolf and Pennsylvania’s legislators get together now to fix their shortsighted and potentially destructive election laws, and if other states follow, then with any luck Mr. Rubio’s bill will never be needed.

But on present trend, in a close presidential race, we are headed toward a vote-counting mess in which both sides claim victory. Don’t rule out furious supporters of the candidates battling in the street. If you think this isn’t possible in America, you haven’t been paying attention to this year’s “summer of love.”

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
WSJ: PA Supreme Court moves goal posts
« Reply #1207 on: September 21, 2020, 11:28:25 PM »
Supreme Chaos in Pennsylvania Voting
The state’s high court rewrites the law to extend ballot counting.
By The Editorial Board
Sept. 18, 2020 6:46 pm ET
SAVE
PRINT
TEXT
474




A mancasts his ballot in the primary election in Philadelphia, June 2, 2020.
PHOTO: JOSHUA ROBERTS/REUTERS
Three days late, and no postmark needed: That’s the ruling on mail votes from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. State law clearly says absentee ballots must be received by 8 p.m. on Election Day. But on Thursday the court controlled by Democrats, in a case filed by Democrats, rewrote the law in a 4-3 vote, with four Democrats in the majority, 47 days before Nov. 3.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH
'Patriotic Education' and Bill Barr's Speech


SUBSCRIBE
“There is no ambiguity regarding the deadline set by the General Assembly,” the court’s majority admits. To overturn it, they cite a line in Pennsylvania’s constitution: “Elections shall be free and equal; and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.” How does that language empower judges to ignore the ballot deadline? We’ll wait while readers search for emanations and penumbras.

Pennsylvania’s election laws are flawed. Voters can request an absentee ballot as late as 5 p.m. on Oct. 27, seven days before the votes are due. The majority opinion calls this “an extremely condensed timeline” that “will unquestionably fail under the strain of COVID-19 and the 2020 Presidential Election, resulting in the disenfranchisement of voters.”

Before the state’s June 2 primary, a crush of applications meant that many ballots went out late. “An elector cannot exercise the franchise,” the majority says, “while her ballot application is awaiting processing in a county election board nor when her ballot is sitting in a USPS facility.” Thus the court orders that ballots be counted if they arrive by Nov. 6. If their postmarks are missing or illegible, they will be “presumed to have been mailed by Election Day” unless evidence shows otherwise.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
Opinion: Morning Editorial Report
All the day's Opinion headlines.

PREVIEW
SUBSCRIBED
The court’s feigned modesty elsewhere in the ruling is hilarious by comparison. Pennsylvania lacks a requirement that voters be notified about defects in their mail ballots, such as faulty signatures. The Supreme Court declined to fabricate one, “particularly in light of the open policy questions attendant to that decision.”

It also declined to order the counting of “naked” ballots, those returned without a secrecy envelope: “We conclude that the Legislature intended for the secrecy envelope provision to be mandatory.” Yet the majority has no qualms about voiding the Nov. 3 ballot deadline, which the Legislature obviously meant to be mandatory.

The effects could be dire. Two weeks ago the state House, which is controlled by Republicans, passed a bill that would set an earlier deadline to request a mail ballot, 15 days before the election. On Tuesday Democratic Governor Tom Wolf had renewed his call for legislative action to count ballots that arrive by Nov. 6, if they’re postmarked. The Legislature is the proper place for that debate, but the court’s ruling means that Mr. Wolf now has little incentive to negotiate.

This also increases the chances that the courts will decide who wins Pennsylvania, and maybe the Presidency. If the race between Donald Trump and Joe Biden is close, the Electoral College could come down to the Keystone State. Thanks to the Pennsylvania court, thousands of voters might not mail their ballots until Nov. 3, possibly meaning no winner for days.

At the margin, the ruling could help Mr. Biden. About 20,000 ballots were rejected in Pennsylvania’s June primary, even after the deadline was extended in some counties. If the polls are right that Biden supporters are much more likely to vote by mail, the new leeway on absentees could redound to his benefit. If ballots are disputed, lawsuits will send vote counting into the courts. Any doubt which candidate the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will favor?

Justices in Pennsylvania run in partisan elections. And the ones who moved the voting deadline on Thursday are Democrats. The two Republicans dissented on that question, as did one independent-minded Democrat. If a close Pennsylvania election ends in rancor, and the result is a winner that one side or the other claims is illegitimate, the four Keystone State Justices will deserve top billing as culprits.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1209 on: September 22, 2020, 02:18:47 PM »
Fk.





Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
bloomberg
« Reply #1215 on: September 24, 2020, 02:50:59 PM »
protecting his Chinese investments

little Napoleon




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
whistle blower on ballot scams
« Reply #1219 on: September 29, 2020, 05:06:08 AM »
"a whole industry"

isn't this obvious when near the end of every close election
the vote counting  in the Democrat bastions is always delayed as long as possible.

Like Florida's southeast counties
or big cites precincts where they try to find enough votes to overturn the REpublican lead in a state wide race:

https://pjmedia.com/election/tyler-o-neil/2020/09/28/2000-bush-v-gore-lawyer-exposes-the-underworld-that-trades-on-ballots-and-forgeries-n982006

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
WSJ: What is the ballot deadline? Who knows?
« Reply #1220 on: October 02, 2020, 02:26:58 PM »
What’s the Ballot Deadline? Who Knows
A month before Nov. 3, the election’s rules are being set by lawsuit.
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 1, 2020 7:27 pm ET

Barely a month is left before Election Day, yet voting rules in pivotal states are still being litigated. This week Pennsylvania Republicans asked the U.S. Supreme Court to halt a state judicial ruling that says late ballots must be counted, even if they lack postmarks and arrive three days after the statutory deadline.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, controlled by Democratic justices who are chosen in partisan elections, issued that order Sept. 17 in a 4-3 vote. State law says valid ballots must arrive by 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. The court unilaterally pushed it to Nov. 6. If a postmark is missing or illegible, officials are told to presume that the ballot was mailed on time.


“This is an open invitation to voters to cast their ballots after Election Day,” say Republican leaders of the Pennsylvania Senate, in their filing to the U.S. Supreme Court. They add that by extending the ballot deadline, the state jurists “usurped” the Legislature’s authority over elections under the U.S. Constitution.

Similar arguments appear in a separate application to the U.S. Supreme Court from the Pennsylvania Republican Party. “This Court should intervene now,” it argues, “to provide guidance to lower courts before the rapidly approaching federal general election.” Justice Samuel Alito, who handles emergency appeals from that region, has asked for a response to the GOP briefs by Monday at 3 p.m. But it’s certainly true that, left to their own devices, judges across the country are making it up as they go.

In Wisconsin last week, a federal judge said ballots postmarked by Election Day could arrive by Nov. 9. State lawmakers and the Republican Party sought a stay. On Tuesday the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the request, saying the GOP hadn’t “suffered an injury” and the Legislature wasn’t “entitled to represent Wisconsin’s interests as a polity.” The mistake was not having a citizen or elector as a co-litigant. But a request for an en banc rehearing has been filed.

In Georgia, a federal judge ordered late-arriving ballots to be counted until Nov. 6. State officials have a stay application pending at the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. “Voters will be confused: ballots already have preprinted instructions that refer to the Election Day Deadline,” it says. Also: “Deciphering whether a ballot has a valid and timely postmark pursuant to the order inserts new subjective considerations.”

In Minnesota a lawsuit filed last week in district court challenges a consent decree agreed to by a Democratic state leader, which says mail votes are valid through Nov. 10, even if they lack postmarks. In Michigan the GOP sued in state court, seeking to overturn a judge’s order that straggling ballots, if mailed by Nov. 2, could arrive as late as Nov. 17.

A lawsuit in North Carolina federal court seeks to kill a legal settlement entered into by the state Board of Elections, which would count postmarked ballots through Nov. 12. Republican lawmakers argue that the U.S. Constitution explicitly empowers the Legislature to set voting rules, meaning the Board of Elections can’t huddle with private litigants to “usurp the General Assembly’s sole authority.”

In Arizona state officials want to stay a federal judge’s order that voters be permitted to fix ballots with missing signatures until “the fifth business day” after Nov. 3. Arizona provides that opportunity if a faulty signature is rejected, but the law says people who outright neglect to sign a ballot must do so by Election Day. “There are entirely reasonable bases to distinguish between signature mismatches and non-signatures,” says the filing at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Specifically, there’s little risk of error in throwing out unsigned ballots, which are “the exclusive fault of the voter.”

***
The U.S. Supreme Court might be hesitant to intervene, but the Pennsylvania appeal has already reached its chambers, and others could get there before Nov. 3. If the Justices don’t step in to stop this chaotic, last-minute judicial law-writing before the election, they might have to do so afterward, at far greater political cost to themselves and the country.

The way to protect democratic confidence is to run elections by the book, not to let judges rewrite state laws willy-nilly in the weeks before Election Day.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
Prager: Voter fraud is real
« Reply #1221 on: October 04, 2020, 08:02:00 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
JW: Vote roll fraud in PA
« Reply #1222 on: October 06, 2020, 03:16:16 PM »

PA Counties Admit They Gave Incorrect Voter Roll Information to the Feds

Very often the real story lies behind the curtain. While the country watched the presidential debate, we were busy fighting for clean voter rolls in Pennsylvania and other states. Clean voter rolls are a foundation of honest elections.
We’ve now learned that the State of Pennsylvania and three Pennsylvania counties admitted they reported incorrect information to a federal agency concerning the removal of ineligible voters from their voter rolls. In April, we filed a lawsuit against Pennsylvania and three of its counties for failing to make reasonable efforts to remove ineligible voters from their rolls, as required by the federal National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) (Judicial Watch v. Pennsylvania, et al (No. 1:02-at-06000)). 
 
Federal regulations require Pennsylvania to certify to the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) the number of voter registrations removed from the rolls under the NVRA because the voter has moved out of state. According to data the State certified to the EAC in the most recent two-year reporting period: 
•   Bucks County, with about 457,000 registrations, removed a total of eight names under the relevant NVRA procedures;
•   Chester County, with about 357,000 registrations, removed five names under those procedures; and
•   Delaware County, with about 403,000 registrations, removed four names under those procedures.
In recent court filings, Pennsylvania admitted it had certified incorrect data to the EAC. The State alleged unverified, revised figures for Bucks, Chester, and Delaware counties. Those three counties also alleged their own unverified, revised figures, which differed, however, from those provided by the State. The new numbers alleged by the State and its counties are still a small fraction of the voter names likely inactive, according to our analysis provided to the court. We contend that, “even if these numbers are accurate, which we do not concede, they would still be removing too few old registrations.”

In its revised filings, the State also conceded that eighteen other Pennsylvania counties—which together contain about one quarter of Pennsylvania’s registered voters—had removed a combined total of fifteen names under the relevant NVRA procedures in the most recent two-year reporting period.

In its continuing efforts to force states and counties across the nation to comply with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), Judicial Watch filed its opposition to Pennsylvania’s move to dismiss our lawsuit, which contends that Bucks, Chester, and Delaware counties failed to conduct a reasonable program to remove ineligible registrants from their federal voter rolls as required under the NVRA. 
 
The lawsuit pointed to the abnormally low number of removals under NVRA procedures designed to identify voters who have changed residence. The lawsuit also pointed out that the Commonwealth had over 800,000 “inactive” registrations on its voter rolls. 
 
We compared registration data in the EAC’s report (which was supplied to the EAC by the counties) to publicly available data from the Census Bureau to conclude that Bucks, Chester, and Delaware Counties had total registration rates, respectively, of 96%, 97%, and 97%. Judicial Watch noted that these numbers are high, both within Pennsylvania and compared to the rest of the country, suggesting a failure to remove outdated registrations.

Other Pennsylvania counties have acted to avoid being sued by us. On January 14, 2020, CBS Pittsburgh reported that because of the threat of a Judicial Watch lawsuit, Allegheny County removed 69,000 inactive voters. David Voye, Elections Manager for the county told CBS, “I would concede that we are behind on culling our rolls,” and that this had “been put on the backburner.”

Pennsylvania’s voting rolls are such as mess that even Pennsylvania can’t tell a court the details of how dirty or clean they are. The simple solution is to follow federal law and take the necessary and simple steps to clean up their voter rolls.
As you know, we are the national leader in enforcing federal law which requires states to take reasonable steps to clean their voting rolls.

In 2018, the Supreme Court upheld a massive voter roll clean up that resulted from our settlement of a federal lawsuit with Ohio.

California also settled a similar lawsuit with us and last year began the process of removing up to 1.5 million “inactive” names from Los Angeles County voting rolls. Kentucky also began a cleanup of up to 250,00 names last year after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.

More election integrity litigation is coming next week, so stay tuned!





ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
sounds to me like leftist fake news
« Reply #1227 on: October 12, 2020, 06:55:23 AM »
https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-republicans-allegedly-setting-fake-043500622.html


let me get this straight
Republicans are setting up fake election boxes at THEIR locations
to block Democrat mail in ballots . 

does not compute

OTOH this news is confirmed by social media posts. says yahoo news




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD)
« Reply #1231 on: October 17, 2020, 11:09:37 AM »
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/17/nolte-commission-chose-twice-registered-democrat-to-moderate-upcoming-presidential-debate/

why do we need this group?
that the Republicans on it are never trumpers is obvious

why do we need more DC "elites" insiders controlling Pres. debates?

https://www.debates.org/about-cpd/

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1233 on: October 19, 2020, 04:04:24 PM »
GM

cant read article without subscribing

but the headline I presume says it all

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1234 on: October 19, 2020, 04:07:31 PM »
GM

cant read article without subscribing

but the headline I presume says it all

Pretty much

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1235 on: October 19, 2020, 04:44:48 PM »
check this out from Heritage Foundation
with list of voter fraud by state

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?state=PA&combine=&year=&case_type=All&fraud_type=All&page=1

Dems:    no fraud ! folks !

      debunked

      right wing conspiracy 

      must be QAnon

      must be Russian disinformation

      already looked into and found by "experts" there is nothing to it

      Right wing conspiracy to suppress the vote - particularly of blacks!   

     


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Yes, we know.
« Reply #1237 on: October 25, 2020, 02:16:39 PM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19442
    • View Profile
The electoral process
« Reply #1238 on: October 26, 2020, 07:07:57 AM »
Three states — Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota — allow voters to switch their votes before Election Day.
    - Business Insider

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process
« Reply #1239 on: October 26, 2020, 07:50:51 AM »
Three states — Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota — allow voters to switch their votes before Election Day.
    - Business Insider

Allow corrupt poll workers to switch your vote.


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Project Veritas in Texas
« Reply #1242 on: October 27, 2020, 03:39:25 PM »
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/391006.php

Vote fraud operation busted in Texas.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1243 on: October 27, 2020, 05:19:24 PM »
".Said Garza Gave Her $2,500 Gift Budget"

Who or what is Garza
I see there is a county named Garza

you mean to tell me the city is paying her to do this?

I am sure FBI is on top of this

7,000 votes from this one person?

in quick search this is being reported only on right of spectrum sites
I notice

dick heads at CNN will maybe mention in one sentence if at all and in way to make it sound like it is BS or right wing propoganda





Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
MI: Open carry at polling places
« Reply #1247 on: October 29, 2020, 04:38:40 AM »
   
Judge Overturns Michigan Ban on Open Carry of Guns at Polling Places
By Jack Phillips
October 28, 2020 Updated: October 28, 2020
Print

A Michigan judge has struck down a statewide ban on openly carrying firearms at polling places or in areas where ballots are being counted.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Christopher Murray ruled that Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, didn’t follow the appropriate process to implement a rule earlier this month.

“It is important to recognize that this case is not about whether it is a good idea to openly carry a firearm at a polling place, or whether the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prevents the secretary of state’s … directive,” Murray said in a written opinion.

“The secretary just didn’t do this in the right way and at the right time,” Murray said during a hearing on the ruling, adding that “the secretary should have done this months ago.”

Benson instituted her rule on Oct. 16, just weeks before Election Day.

“The court’s duty is not to act as an overseer of the Department of State, nor is it to impose its view on the wisdom of openly carrying firearms at polling places or other election locations,” he said, according to the Detroit Free Press. “More importantly, its constitutional role is properly limited to only declaring what the law is, not what it should be.”

Murray stipulated in his ruling that Benson should have implemented the ban on open carry under the Administrative Procedures Act, which would allow legislative and public input.

“The Legislature has said: Here are the places you cannot carry a weapon,” Murray said, as reported by the Detroit News. “The secretary has expanded that. And so how is that in accordance with state law?”

Benson and Attorney General Dana Nessel, also a Democrat, issued statements and said they would appeal Murray’s ruling.

“As the state’s chief elections officer, I have the sworn duty to protect every voter and their right to cast the ballot free from intimidation and harassment,” Benson said in her statement. “I will continue to protect that right in Michigan.”

Assistant Attorney General Heather Meingast told the Free Press that because of an alleged kidnapping plot against Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, “there are voters who are afraid … there are election workers who are afraid.”

The challenge against Benson’s order was filed by activist Robert Davis, and another was filed by three pro-gun groups: Michigan Open Carry, Inc., Michigan Gun Owners, and the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners.

Davis, in a statement, hailed Benson’s ruling as a victory “for the rule of law,” saying Benson’s ban was “an unnecessary overreach by an executive official in state government.”

The Detroit chapter of the NAACP and lawyers in the area said they would monitor polls across the state for any potential voter intimidation problems.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Zuckerberg donating to election administration in democrat areas
« Reply #1248 on: October 29, 2020, 08:42:41 PM »