Election Fraud in 2016: Is This Democracy?

  • metta

    Posts: 44751

    Aug 16, 2016 5:12 AM GMT
    Election Fraud in 2016: Is This Democracy?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2016 5:32 AM GMT
    NYT: In-person voter fraud — in which you impersonate someone or try to vote more than once, or at all if you are ineligible — is almost entirely nonexistent in the United States. (An exhaustive Loyola Law School study could find only 31 “credible allegations of fraud” in a one-billion-vote sample.) But election fraud — ballot stuffing, vote buying, machine rigging — is not unheard-of, and in that shade of distinction lay an important new development.

    Contributing to that confusion was a group formed in 1996 in Virginia, the Voting Integrity Project, known as V.I.P. One member of the group’s advisory board was an obscure elections official out of Georgia named Hans von Spakovsky, who would become a central figure in the campaign against fraud.

    Von Spakovsky first became active in politics as a particularly assertive chairman of his local homeowners’ association. After a stint as a poll watcher, he became obsessed with the specter of voter fraud and the idea that every voter should have to show photographic identification at polls. He began writing in small conservative journals on the need for states and counties to scrub felons and dead people from their voter rolls, which led to a seat on the board of the Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections in Georgia — and also caught the eye of V.I.P.

    V.I.P. ostensibly offered its services to all comers, but it tended to investigate Democrats. Its first big case came in Louisiana. When the Democrat Mary Landrieu defeated the Republican Woody Jenkins by a narrow margin in the 1996 Senate race, Republicans called in V.I.P., which reported that Landrieu’s election was a result of a complex fraud scheme. A Senate committee investigated and instead found evidence that a Jenkins operative may have coached the witnesses, four of whom recanted. The Senate inquiry determined that there was “no evidence of an organized, widespread effort to secure fraudulent votes.”

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2016 2:22 PM GMT
    This entire election cycle seems a bit of an outlier so I'd not be surprised if real, unaltered results somewhat challenged typical stats though I'd not excuse it by that. I'd like to see if those numbers tracked or deviated from pre-polling and to exit polls.

    Regardless, @ about 21:48 she projects still--even given the possibility of a fix--though more minimally, a Clinton win. So by that she's saying the end-result would have been the same even--and they shouldn't have been--but even if numbers were fixed to lean in that direction.

    And on the Trump side, well, he won. So I’m not sure what was the point of the video arguing that he complained that the system was rigged against him. So that strikes me as a little fishy.

    Whether there was some fixing done, I'd certainly not want that. My candidate, Bernie, did not win, but she notes that he wouldn't have won even without what she calls a fix and Trump did win even with what he called a fix. So somewhere there's some bullshit going on but I'm not certain the video points to it or just adds to it.

    Re-regardless, I’m definitely for hand counted paper ballot and anti-electric ballot not because I'd necessarily believe this was fixed without further evidence but because paper would seem to me for whatever intuitive reason helpful in eliminating that possibility. Though, frankly and by experience, who knows what other shenanigans might occur. Signed, very truly yours, Chad