No Such Thing As voter Fraud..Realy??? - Page 2 - Jaguar Forums - Jaguar Enthusiasts Forum

Go Back  Jaguar Forums - Jaguar Enthusiasts Forum > General Jaguar Forums > Off Topic
Reload this Page >

No Such Thing As voter Fraud..Realy???

Notices
Off Topic A place for you car junkies to boldly post off topic. ALMOST anything goes. Fun, laughs and good times here.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

No Such Thing As voter Fraud..Realy???

  #21  
Old 10-17-2018, 08:56 PM
Veteran Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Upland, CA.
Posts: 5,441
Thanked 760 Times in 546 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by christ View Post
Nope. Still not understanding. How does concentrating people in.a few counties change anything? If we were to assume that every person gets one vote, then nothing changes wherever they live, so it can't be that. If it is (say) one vote for each county, then concentrating all the people in a few counties means that they have less say over all, as there are a lot more grey counties than blue, so it can't be that.

How does putting a lot of people in a county help those people "dominate the federal elections"? What is it that means "The populations in the grey (mostly conservative) areas (some very sparsely populated) would have little or no say in elections"?

I'm not sure that you mean that the grey area gets "2 senators and one representative", because that seems low, and you can't possibly mean that each grey area gets "2 senators and one representative" or there would be thousands of them - what precisely do you mean?

Are you trying to say that you believe that you consider that the majority would have an "unfairly large representation" in federal elections because they are the majority, and therefore the Electoral College evens the playing field by giving the rural minority an unfairly large representation?

As you can see, it is difficult to follow argument by sound bite.
I should have clarified it a bit. It should read that each STATE gets a minimum of 3 electoral votes..NOT counties.
 
  #22  
Old 10-18-2018, 01:13 PM
mrsclark's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: DFW
Posts: 129
Thanked 38 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by christ View Post
Nope. Still not understanding. How does concentrating people in.a few counties change anything? If we were to assume that every person gets one vote, then nothing changes wherever they live, so it can't be that. If it is (say) one vote for each county, then concentrating all the people in a few counties means that they have less say over all, as there are a lot more grey counties than blue, so it can't be that.

How does putting a lot of people in a county help those people "dominate the federal elections"? What is it that means "The populations in the grey (mostly conservative) areas (some very sparsely populated) would have little or no say in elections"?

I'm not sure that you mean that the grey area gets "2 senators and one representative", because that seems low, and you can't possibly mean that each grey area gets "2 senators and one representative" or there would be thousands of them - what precisely do you mean?

Are you trying to say that you believe that you consider that the majority would have an "unfairly large representation" in federal elections because they are the majority, and therefore the Electoral College evens the playing field by giving the rural minority an unfairly large representation?

As you can see, it is difficult to follow argument by sound bite.
What he is saying is that we are NOT a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic, we elect representatives, you get your House representatives based on population so yes, all those higher population areas DO have a higher number of representatives in the House. Every state gets two Senators regardless of population, originally Senators were appointed by the state legislators and that was done that way as a means for the individual states to protect themselves from the tyranny of the Federal govt. This was changed by the 17th amendment which corrupted the actual purpose.

If we were a democracy, the minority would be ruled by the majority, regardless of where they live. So the majority of any group, would be able to control the minority that live in different circumstances in a different location, under different circumstances. That isn't the way this country was designed.
 
  #23  
Old 10-18-2018, 10:43 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest USA
Posts: 19,499
Thanked 6,128 Times in 4,599 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mrsclark View Post
If we were a democracy, the minority would be ruled by the majority, regardless of where they live. So the majority of any group, would be able to control the minority that live in different circumstances in a different location, under different circumstances. That isn't the way this country was designed.

The "tyranny of the majority" still exists within the electoral system, though, thanks to the winner-takes-all allocation system used by virtually all the states. A candidate with 51% of the votes gets the entire electoral allotment of that state, leaving the 49% minority feeling unrepresented. I think that's what most people object to.

Cheers
DD

 
  #24  
Old 10-19-2018, 07:17 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Gosport
Posts: 224
Thanked 70 Times in 51 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mrsclark View Post
What he is saying is that we are NOT a Democracy.
I thought so. Why didn't he just say that?

So the system is deliberately designed to devalue some people's votes, and over-value other people's. We are just in a discussion about how much the system should be rigged in order to get the desired result. That does sound like "voter fraud" is built-in to the system

What the original picture "Civics 101", as I recall, actually indicated was that you can't leave democracy to fend or itself or the city folk will win. I'm not sure that the Electoral College actually solves this "problem", it just seems to give a different wrong answer.
 
  #25  
Old 10-19-2018, 07:23 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Gosport
Posts: 224
Thanked 70 Times in 51 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Jayt2 View Post
I should have clarified it a bit. It should read that each STATE gets a minimum of 3 electoral votes..NOT counties.
Thanks.

So what you are saying is that the electoral college evens the playing field by giving more power to the fewer ("mostly conservative") people and reduce the effect of the more numerous "liberals". How can that be characterised as "evening the playing field ", when what it is actually is cheating?
 
The Following User Says Thank You to christ For This Useful Post:
jackra_1 (10-19-2018)
  #26  
Old 10-19-2018, 08:39 AM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: MD
Posts: 3,404
Thanked 794 Times in 613 Posts
Default

On top of that you have ample evidence of voter suppression going on.

In Georgia Kemp's continuing blatant efforts to block legitimate voters from voting in the multiple thousands. He is not only top of the ticket but he is also the Secretary Of State.

Kinda like the fox supervising security of a chicken coop.

It is happening in many states and it is being done openly.

IF the Democrats flip the House in a few weeks just watch the right wing fake media launch their claims of voter fraud and as usual with no factual backup.

Several well known pundits are now characterizing our current very severe polarization as a cold civil war.
 

Last edited by jackra_1; 10-19-2018 at 08:45 AM.
  #27  
Old 10-19-2018, 08:55 AM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest USA
Posts: 19,499
Thanked 6,128 Times in 4,599 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jackra_1 View Post
On top of that you have ample evidence of voter suppression going on.

In Georgia Kemp's continuing blatant efforts to block legitimate voters from voting in the multiple thousands. He is not only top of the ticket but he is also the Secretary Of State.

Kinda like the fox supervising security of a chicken coop.

Stunning, isn't it?


IF the Democrats flip the House in a few weeks just watch the right wing fake media launch their claims of voter fraud and as usual with no factual backup.

In some circles it's become a virtually reflexive response


Several well known pundits are now characterizing our current very severe polarization as a cold civil war.

Which is pretty ripe considering that, IMO, pundits shoulder a lot of the blame for creating the polarization. The're buttering their own bread.

Cheers
DD
 
  #28  
Old 10-19-2018, 09:12 AM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: MD
Posts: 3,404
Thanked 794 Times in 613 Posts
Default

A lot right now is "stunning".


I cut a lot from my reply as it is more appropriate to the American Politics thread.
 

Last edited by jackra_1; 10-19-2018 at 09:19 AM.
  #29  
Old 10-19-2018, 12:30 PM
mrsclark's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: DFW
Posts: 129
Thanked 38 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jackra_1 View Post
On top of that you have ample evidence of voter suppression going on.

In Georgia Kemp's continuing blatant efforts to block legitimate voters from voting in the multiple thousands. He is not only top of the ticket but he is also the Secretary Of State.
.
Jackra, I don't agree with you on much, but, after reading an article on the Kemp situation, I gotta give you this point. There is NO WAY he should be able to hold both positions in this manner. Its a conflict of interest and is ripe for corruption. I saw an article that purported to be about a bus load of people being turned away from the poles, but it was a brief sentence and then gave zero actual details. So I don't know how to make a judgment on that.
 
The Following User Says Thank You to mrsclark For This Useful Post:
jackra_1 (10-19-2018)
  #30  
Old 10-19-2018, 01:38 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: MD
Posts: 3,404
Thanked 794 Times in 613 Posts
Default

I do a lot of research on "stuff" before I make a post and try and cross check several different sources on a particular "claim".

I used to be a "middle of the road guy" and would love to be able to go back to that position but in the current climate that appears unlikely for me to do that.
 
  #31  
Old 10-30-2018, 08:54 PM
Veteran Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Upland, CA.
Posts: 5,441
Thanked 760 Times in 546 Posts
Default

So how is requiring a voter to have ID racist?

 
The Following User Says Thank You to Jayt2 For This Useful Post:
RudyF6 (11-05-2018)
  #32  
Old 10-30-2018, 09:48 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest USA
Posts: 19,499
Thanked 6,128 Times in 4,599 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Jayt2 View Post
So how is requiring a voter to have ID racist?
Expressed that way there's nothing racial about it. But, obviously, it depends on how and why it's done.

In North Carolina (Um...I think it was NC....not certain. But it was in the south) , for example, forms of I.D. most commonly held by minorities were deemed unacceptable for voting purposes while the types of I.D. most commonly held by white people were OK. As it turned out this was no accident. It was calculated, and was one of the reasons the law was stricken down. In that case I believe it was proven to the court's satisfaction that the justification for creating law seemed innocent but the actual intent of the law was to discriminate against racial minorities.


Cheers
DD

 
The Following User Says Thank You to Doug For This Useful Post:
jackra_1 (10-31-2018)
  #33  
Old 10-31-2018, 07:03 AM
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: PHX some of the time
Posts: 98,131
Thanked 4,591 Times in 4,131 Posts
Default

Wouldn't the better solution have been to change the law to allow other forms of ID?
 
  #34  
Old 10-31-2018, 08:35 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: mocksville nc
Posts: 166
Thanked 50 Times in 42 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Norri View Post
Wouldn't the better solution have been to change the law to allow other forms of ID?
The republican majority in the NC legislator wrote that law purposely that way to suppress the blacks votes which is why it took an impartial judge to rule on it.
They passed various laws before the Democratic governor that won a heated election took office that strips the governor of his ability to place administrators and judges in positions during his tenure
These were positions that have always been at the discretion of the sitting governor. Just more obstructive power play politics.
 
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to swayne For This Useful Post:
Doug (10-31-2018), jackra_1 (10-31-2018)
  #35  
Old 10-31-2018, 08:56 AM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest USA
Posts: 19,499
Thanked 6,128 Times in 4,599 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Norri View Post
Wouldn't the better solution have been to change the law to allow other forms of ID?

Of course, thus avoiding the courts. But that's up to the legislators. Whoever the plaintiff was in the case sought to have the law stricken down....and prevailed. Whether or not it was rewritten, I don't recall.

But the point is this: simply "requiring voter ID", in and of itself, is not racist or discriminatory. It comes down to how and why the laws are written. That's why memes such as the one posted above, are so misleading.


Cheers
DD
 
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Doug For This Useful Post:
jackra_1 (10-31-2018), Sean W (10-31-2018)
  #36  
Old 10-31-2018, 05:34 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 5,000
Thanked 1,335 Times in 969 Posts
Default

They don't want other forms of ID because they don't want the votes. The recent spate in North Dakota which now prohibits Native Americans from casting a ballot simply because they don't use street addresses on their reservation was clearly an attempt to suppress votes. Since most of those Native Americans admit that they align with democrats, and the bill was crafted and passed by a republican majority, one can conclude the ultimate goal is to suppress democratic votes and the easiest way to do it is to target the vulnerable, which are often minorities.

So is is race driven or vote driven? I think both but am not privy to the quiet whispers within the various legislative halls.

Adding the latest on the ND law:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...es-stolen.html
 

Last edited by Sean W; 10-31-2018 at 05:40 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sean W For This Useful Post:
Doug (10-31-2018), jackra_1 (10-31-2018)
  #37  
Old 10-31-2018, 05:47 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 5,000
Thanked 1,335 Times in 969 Posts
Default

This entire thread baffles me as Trump launched a panel that was ultimately dismantled for lack of evidence of voter fraud.

https://www.propublica.org/article/e...of-voter-fraud

I'm sure there is right wing coverage of this too. i don't know if propublica leans left or right. I don't normally read it.

Here's an interesting find:

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/the-ch...re-we-reading/
 
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sean W For This Useful Post:
Doug (10-31-2018), jackra_1 (10-31-2018)
  #38  
Old 11-03-2018, 10:33 AM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest USA
Posts: 19,499
Thanked 6,128 Times in 4,599 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sean W View Post

A judge has upheld the law on that basis that it's too close to election day to change anything while also admitting details of the law itself is cause for ".....great concern....".

Meanwhile, grassroots anger is apparently on the rise and future political pay-back a possibility. Excuse me for saying it but "the natives are restless".

Meanwhile still, a judge has ruled against Kemp in Georgia.

Cheers
DD


 
  #39  
Old 11-04-2018, 04:18 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: MD
Posts: 3,404
Thanked 794 Times in 613 Posts
Default

The following was posted today:

"(Reuters) - Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, the Republican candidate in Tuesday's hotly contested gubernatorial election, has opened a probe of the state Democratic Party over what his office alleged on Sunday was a failed attempt to hack voter registration systems."

How low can this guy go?

Even in the very unlikely event the hacking happened how does he know it was the Democratic Party.

Dont forget he was the one to have the databases wiped clean when he was accused of NOT having adequate anti hacker protection.

He is getting ready for a recount or some such if he loses.
 

Last edited by jackra_1; 11-04-2018 at 04:21 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to jackra_1 For This Useful Post:
Doug (11-04-2018)
  #40  
Old 11-04-2018, 06:19 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest USA
Posts: 19,499
Thanked 6,128 Times in 4,599 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jackra_1 View Post

Even in the very unlikely event the hacking happened how does he know it was the Democratic Party.

All he has to do is plant the seed. It doesn't have to be true.



He is getting ready for a recount or some such if he loses.
Almost a given..

Many conservative constituents have already been convinced that there is widespread voter fraud in favor of Democrats. A week's pay says if any Dem wins by a close call in any state, there will be immediate accusations of voter fraud.

Funded by George Soros, of course

Cheers
DD
 
The Following User Says Thank You to Doug For This Useful Post:
jackra_1 (11-04-2018)

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: No Such Thing As voter Fraud..Realy???


Advertising
Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: