fraud in mail in voting - prove it

[Comshaw]

So far what I've seen here is a lot of "points to" "maybe" "could be" and "possibly can be" a problem. The missing ballot issue isn't proof of anything nefarious. As stated it has a lot to do with outdated voter rolls and NOTHING to do with factual evidence that voter fraud had taken place because of those unreturned ballots. You have shown me NO actual evidence that mail-in voting is the election security black hole that has been claimed. You can pontificate and speculate all you want. That doesn't mean that it's true.

And as far as FGB's link, the article claims mail-in voting fraud, while never actually offering ANY proof of that claim.

It tries a red herring by pointing to Hillary's 2.8 million more votes then the donald's in the 2016 election and also citing the 6 million missing votes as a "possible" explanation in favor of voter fraud. Every part of that article was full of those terms "possible" "could be" "maybe", again nothing more than speculation and innuendo with no factual backup. That election was 3 1/2 years ago. The donald demanded a voter investigation and many states complied. They found little or nothing. Why? Because there was none at the level they claimed there was.

I won't even go into FGB's suggestion that ballots from one election can be used in future elections. Anybody with half a brain can understand why that can't happen.

Nothing has been offered to verify that voter fraud on a level to affect an election exists. Speculation, yes. Things that were investigated but found nothing, yes.

So we now circle back to my original statement: prove it. It's as simple as that.

Comshaw

 

[Klinkster]

Since you insist on ignoring common sense, and evidence, it’s unprovable to you

You prove, that common sense, is uncommon.

 

[Rightguide]

Since you insist on ignoring common sense, and evidence, it’s unprovable to you

You prove, that common sense, is uncommon.

The OP is a useless waste of time and effort. He's connected at the hip to Left Wing Talking Points.Com. You could bury him in the "evidence" that is already in the public domain at stratospheric amounts, and won't see it. He lies a lot as well. Just sayin'.

 

[Klinkster]

The OP is a useless waste of time and effort. He's connected at the hip to Left Wing Talking Points.Com. You could bury him in the "evidence" that is already in the public domain at stratospheric amounts, and won't see it. He lies a lot as well. Just sayin'.

I can’t argue with that.

I’m sure Comshit will.

 

[butters]

Since you insist on ignoring common sense, and evidence, it’s unprovable to you

You prove, that common sense, is uncommon.

so far, the courts have ruled there is NO evidence. they told trump to put up or shut up. the paperwork submitted contained NO sustainable evidence, mere outdated isolated instances and quotes from people saying there's fraud--with no evidence. so now you are better informed than the judge and court-attendees on this matter? as com says, as the court says, "put up or shut up"

 

[zipman]

so far, the courts have ruled there is NO evidence. they told trump to put up or shut up. the paperwork submitted contained NO sustainable evidence, mere outdated isolated instances and quotes from people saying there's fraud--with no evidence. so now you are better informed than the judge and court-attendees on this matter? as com says, as the court says, "put up or shut up"

They can't. There is no evidence and they haven't been able to show that there is any evidence of any kind of widespread voter fraud.

They make this claim to distract people from the voter suppression that Republicans are engaged in.

 

[Klinkster]

so far, the courts have ruled there is NO evidence. they told trump to put up or shut up. the paperwork submitted contained NO sustainable evidence, mere outdated isolated instances and quotes from people saying there's fraud--with no evidence. so now you are better informed than the judge and court-attendees on this matter? as com says, as the court says, "put up or shut up"

What happened in New Jersey?

 

[Rightguide]

I can’t argue with that.

I’m sure Comshit will.

I'm not worried, I'm on Ignore.

 

[Klinkster]

I'm not worried, I'm on Ignore.

With that one, ignore is a good place to be.

 

[Rightguide]

With that one, ignore is a good place to be.

Totally agree. I've seen more responsive brick walls.

 

[Klinkster]

Nothing to see here.......move along......move along.......



https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

 

[Dribble]

They can't. There is no evidence and they haven't been able to show that there is any evidence of any kind of widespread voter fraud.

They make this claim to distract people from the voter suppression that Republicans are engaged in.

Exactly. But we see them for the traitors they are.

 

[butters]

Nothing to see here.......move along......move along.......



https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

so, out of a population of 300+ million, with approximately 200million eligible to vote, this site lists 1,296 cases of voter fraud resulting in 1,119 criminal convictions.


a: shows most getting caught are prosecuted successfully (as it should be)

b: no evidence of 'widespread voter fraud', in the millions suggested by trump or even in the tens of thousands, but--rather--a small and strongly prosecuted countrywide number. certainly not enough to have a deep influence on presidential elections; certainly not restricted to one political party; certainly involving 'absentee ballots' in a significant percentage.

ergo: no evidence a court will accept as widespread voter fraud

now if only you could get more worked up about the 1,000 a day us deaths from covid.

 

[HisArpy]

You're claiming ballots were sent to people who weren't registered voters? First graders received ballots? I feel safe in saying this did not happen.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...ngs-dead-people-raise-gop-hackles/5335580002/

 

[Klinkster]

so, out of a population of 300+ million, with approximately 200million eligible to vote, this site lists 1,296 cases of voter fraud resulting in 1,119 criminal convictions.


a: shows most getting caught are prosecuted successfully (as it should be)

b: no evidence of 'widespread voter fraud', in the millions suggested by trump or even in the tens of thousands, but--rather--a small and strongly prosecuted countrywide number. certainly not enough to have a deep influence on presidential elections; certainly not restricted to one political party; certainly involving 'absentee ballots' in a significant percentage.

ergo: no evidence a court will accept as widespread voter fraud

now if only you could get more worked up about the 1,000 a day us deaths from covid.

Fraud is fraud.

We only know about the ones who are caught, meaning, we don’t know the quantity of the ones who are not. To say it is not widespread, is pure conjecture & speculation.

You fail to understand, that what happened in New Jersey, can happen across the nation.
You choose to ignore it. That, is foolish.
Fraud may benefit Biden, or it may benefit Trump.
I would suggest it would benefit ALL, to prevent any, and ALL fraud, no matter the perpetrator, and which ‘side’ they are on. Some elections are decided by a mere hand-full of votes.

But....that is not the viewpoint of the left, and therefore, not your’s either, as you just buy into and repeat their talking points.

 

[Klinkster]

Nothing to see here......move along.....move along.......

https://dailycaller.com/2020/07/10/dead-cat-voter-registration-mail-ballot-fraud/

 

[HisArpy]

Fraud is fraud.

We only know about the ones who are caught, meaning, we don’t know the quantity of the ones who are not. To say it is not widespread, is pure conjecture & speculation.

You fail to understand, that what happened in New Jersey, can happen across the nation.
You choose to ignore it. That, is foolish.
Fraud may benefit Biden, or it may benefit Trump.
I would suggest it would benefit ALL, to prevent any, and ALL fraud, no matter the perpetrator, and which ‘side’ they are on. Some elections are decided by a mere hand-full of votes.

But....that is not the viewpoint of the left, and therefore, not your’s either, as you just buy into and repeat their talking points.

What they fail to recognize, because they refuse to acknowledge that they're wrong, is that ONE instance is sufficient to refute their narrative of "it doesn't happen."

"Doesn't happen" means NEVER, yet if there's ONE FACTUAL REBUTTAL, they're wrong.

Changing the narrative to "it's uncommon" doesn't defeat the concern that it will happen this election and affect the outcome.

So what they do is ignore the data and facts and repeat the LIES that they're fed.

 

[Dribble]

so, out of a population of 300+ million, with approximately 200million eligible to vote, this site lists 1,296 cases of voter fraud resulting in 1,119 criminal convictions.


a: shows most getting caught are prosecuted successfully (as it should be)

b: no evidence of 'widespread voter fraud', in the millions suggested by trump or even in the tens of thousands, but--rather--a small and strongly prosecuted countrywide number. certainly not enough to have a deep influence on presidential elections; certainly not restricted to one political party; certainly involving 'absentee ballots' in a significant percentage.

ergo: no evidence a court will accept as widespread voter fraud

now if only you could get more worked up about the 1,000 a day us deaths from covid.

He can't. As long as it isn't him, he doesn't give a fuck how many die.

 

[butters]

We only know about the ones who are caught, meaning, we don’t know the quantity of the ones who are not. To say it is not widespread, is pure conjecture & speculation.

tell it to your american courts

 

[butters]

He can't. As long as it isn't him, he doesn't give a fuck how many die.

i know

 

[Klinkster]

tell it to your american courts

The answer is not to try and fix voter fraud after the fact.

The answer is to prevent it.

Mail in voting makes fraud easier. A lot easier.

But, I guess you are OK with that.
many are not.

 

[DeluxAuto]

The answer is not to try and fix voter fraud after the fact.

The answer is to prevent it.

Mail in voting makes fraud easier. A lot easier.

But, I guess you are OK with that.
many are not.

Prove it.

 

[Dribble]

Prove it.

He can't

 

[Comshaw]

What they fail to recognize, because they refuse to acknowledge that they're wrong, is that ONE instance is sufficient to refute their narrative of "it doesn't happen."

"Doesn't happen" means NEVER, yet if there's ONE FACTUAL REBUTTAL, they're wrong.

Changing the narrative to "it's uncommon" doesn't defeat the concern that it will happen this election and affect the outcome.

So what they do is ignore the data and facts and repeat the LIES that they're fed.

Where did I say it doesn't happen? I said, "Nothing has been offered to verify that voter fraud on a level to affect an election exists." I have in the past detailed how many cases were found here in my state. While I can't remember offhand exactly how many that was, the approximate percentage of fraudulent votes out of all votes cast was around .0004%

So if you'd like to quit trying to derail the conversation by complaining about that which has already been acquiesced as true and addressed, perhaps you'd like to show me any proof you have of mail-in voter fraud at a level that would have ANY effect on an election?

Comshaw

 

[Klinkster]

Nothing to see here......move along.....move along.....

“Canvassers demand answers after 72% of Detroit's absentee ballot counts were off“


https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...oit-perfect-storm-voting-problems/5616629002/