Trump campaign launches drive to recruit 'election observers'

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Literally brownshirts. This man is attempting to undermine our democracy.

I don't think we are a democracy. We are a republic.

Obfuscation like a first class Trumpeter.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bro, I'm undecided. I'm not a Trumpster. I'm just pointing out, that we are a constitutional republic.

Which is a type of democracy known as a representative democracy. Admittedly if we were in a poli-sci course we could argue the merits for days, but almost any modern usage of 'democracy' encompasses representative democracy which is the most common form of democracy in the world today.

[skoods]

It might be voter intimidation, but it may be valid. I don't know. People should not be voting 15 times a day. Voting needs to be truthful and fair. Period. Dead people should not be voting.

LOL did you type that while wearing your tin foil hat?

[afleitch]

I like the term 'Trumpshirts'

[Suburbia]

It might be voter intimidation, but it may be valid. I don't know. People should not be voting 15 times a day. Voting needs to be truthful and fair. Period. Dead people should not be voting.

LOL did you type that while wearing your tin foil hat?

Dude, I just want voting to be fair and full of integrity. That's all. I'm not advocating for voter suppression or anything like that. I just want voting to be fair.

[GeorgiaModerate]

It might be voter intimidation, but it may be valid. I don't know. People should not be voting 15 times a day. Voting needs to be truthful and fair. Period. Dead people should not be voting.

LOL did you type that while wearing your tin foil hat?

Dude, I just want voting to be fair and full of integrity. That's all. I'm not advocating for voter suppression or anything like that. I just want voting to be fair.

Everyone wants voting to be fair.  Which of these is more unfair: making it difficult for entitled voters to do so (which it has been documented that voter ID laws do), or allowing a faint possibility of fraud by voter impersonation (which has been documented to be extremely difficult and rare)?

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

It might be voter intimidation, but it may be valid. I don't know. People should not be voting 15 times a day. Voting needs to be truthful and fair. Period. Dead people should not be voting.

LOL did you type that while wearing your tin foil hat?

Dude, I just want voting to be fair and full of integrity. That's all. I'm not advocating for voter suppression or anything like that. I just want voting to be fair.

You do realize Trump doesn't care in the least about voting fairness; he's simply using it as an out for when he eventually loses this election. I don't think anyone here /doesn't/ care about voting fairness; it simply isn't a huge issue in this country, - and when it is (voting suppression laws) it's certainly not Democrats pushing it.

[Bismarck]

Well neither his website nor the article really were specific about what these people are going to be doing. I know in Indiana it is a fairly common practice to have campaign staff in polling locations to see who votes so they can call supporters who have not shown up. Also is it not normal in other states to have campaign workers outside polling stations with literature and signs etc.? I would assume these people would be doing one of these things or the other. Am I missing something?

[RI]

Don't primary elections often have observers?

[Vega]

ACORN hasnt existed in 6 years.

[Ebsy]

This would likely be illegal: https://www.brennancenter.org/legal-work/dnc-v-rnc-consent-decree

[muon2]

All major elections and some local elections will use some number of election observers, or pollwatchers as they are often called. Both parties have a healthy supply of pollwatchers they can call upon. In IL there's an official form one uses to identify oneself as a pollwatcher to the election judges at a polling place. Pollwatchers can check voter lists at precincts to insure that the proper voters are casting ballots there, but they also can check on a number of other polling place procedures.

I've been a pollwatcher a number of times. I've even flagged some irregularities a few times. I've pointed out voters who came to the wrong precinct, and they were in turn informed where they needed to go instead. Most irregularities were due to lack of knowledge of the detailed election rules by the election judges, and they usually corrected their procedures when they were informed. Sometimes they would check with the county authorities to confirm, and that's fine too. One time I noticed that part of a subdivision had been miscoded by the county and was voting for the wrong candidates. This isn't the type of fraud I think people are talking about, but it does influence the outcome of elections.

[Virginiá]

All major elections and some local elections will use some number of election observers, or pollwatchers as they are often called. Both parties have a healthy supply of pollwatchers they can call upon. In IL there's an official form one uses to identify oneself as a pollwatcher to the election judges at a polling place. Pollwatchers can check voter lists at precincts to insure that the proper voters are casting ballots there, but they also can check on a number of other polling place procedures.

I've been a pollwatcher a number of times. I've even flagged some irregularities a few times. I've pointed out voters who came to the wrong precinct, and they were in turn informed where they needed to go instead. Most irregularities were due to lack of knowledge of the detailed election rules by the election judges, and they usually corrected their procedures when they were informed. Sometimes they would check with the county authorities to confirm, and that's fine too. One time I noticed that part of a subdivision had been miscoded by the county and was voting for the wrong candidates. This isn't the type of fraud I think people are talking about, but it does influence the outcome of elections.

What you're speaking of is legitimate, sure, but what Trump seems to be doing seems very risky. He's trying to convince all his supporters that Democrats are going to steal the election, and then enlisting his supporters to go "watch" polls in this mindset? Given the nature of his base, it's not hard to see how this can go wrong. He's basically running a white nationalist campaign and he's telling his supporters to go watch, for example, in PA precincts where there will be lots of minority voters - voters those supporters probably think are cheating.

This just feels wrong and like a disaster waiting to happen.. and all so he can justify his likely eventual loss by crying about fraud.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

All major elections and some local elections will use some number of election observers, or pollwatchers as they are often called. Both parties have a healthy supply of pollwatchers they can call upon. In IL there's an official form one uses to identify oneself as a pollwatcher to the election judges at a polling place. Pollwatchers can check voter lists at precincts to insure that the proper voters are casting ballots there, but they also can check on a number of other polling place procedures.

I've been a pollwatcher a number of times. I've even flagged some irregularities a few times. I've pointed out voters who came to the wrong precinct, and they were in turn informed where they needed to go instead. Most irregularities were due to lack of knowledge of the detailed election rules by the election judges, and they usually corrected their procedures when they were informed. Sometimes they would check with the county authorities to confirm, and that's fine too. One time I noticed that part of a subdivision had been miscoded by the county and was voting for the wrong candidates. This isn't the type of fraud I think people are talking about, but it does influence the outcome of elections.

What you're speaking of is legitimate, sure, but what Trump seems to be doing seems very risky. He's trying to convince all his supporters that Democrats are going to steal the election, and then enlisting his supporters to go "watch" polls in this mindset? Given the nature of his base, it's not hard to see how this can go wrong. He's basically running a white nationalist campaign and he's telling his supporters to go watch, for example, in PA precincts where there will be lots of minority voters - voters those supporters probably think are cheating.

This just feels wrong and like a disaster waiting to happen.. and all so he can justify his likely eventual loss by crying about fraud.

Trump wants to energize his voters to go and f**king vote. It might be one of many ways to do it.
But yeah, it probably will also trigger KKK members to be acting like they are in charge /:

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Literally brownshirts. This man is attempting to undermine our democracy.

He looks more like a historical fascist every day.

[Ebsy]

This will likely be illegal due to the 1982 agreement.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Well neither his website nor the article really were specific about what these people are going to be doing. I know in Indiana it is a fairly common practice to have campaign staff in polling locations to see who votes so they can call supporters who have not shown up. Also is it not normal in other states to have campaign workers outside polling stations with literature and signs etc.? I would assume these people would be doing one of these things or the other. Am I missing something?

In the states out west that I'm familiar with, it's illegal to have anyone campaigning in any way, shape, or form, within a pretty big distance of a polling place.

And observers are usually present for vote counting, and they're usually local party people. The only way Trump would need to recruit more if those is if his campaign is seriously worried that the entire membership of local party branches will stay home. (In which case he'd be screwed anyway.)

At best, this is cover for his "I'm the real President" post-election marketing gig. (He'll sue for sure. Maybe hoping for an out-of-court bribe settlement from President Clinton, direct from the US Mint?)

At worst, he's planning on a "yuge" voter intimidation effort.

Either way, he's terrible and anyone supporting him should be ashamed of themselves.

[GeorgiaModerate]

In the states out west that I'm familiar with, it's illegal to have anyone campaigning in any way, shape, or form, within a pretty big distance of a polling place.

In Georgia, no campaigning is allowed within 150 feet of a polling place or 25 feet of the line of voters.  Specifically:

"No person shall solicit votes in any manner or by any means or method, nor shall any person distribute or display any campaign literature, newspaper, booklet, pamphlet, card, sign, paraphernalia, or any other written or printed matter of any kind, nor shall any person solicit signatures for any petition or conduct any exit poll or public opinion poll with voters on any day in which ballots are being
cast: (1) within 150 feet of the outer edge of any building within which a polling place is established; (2) within any polling place; or (3) within 25 feet of any voter standing in line to vote at any polling place. (Ga. Code Ann. § 21‐2‐414(a))"

[Lyin' Steve]

Trump not-so-subtly implying that Hillary is telling her people to vote for her 15 times:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://time.com/4445813/donald-trump-second-amendment-speech/

[Hermit For Peace]

I can't believe the way Trump talks. He is 70 years old and speaks like a child. What is the appeal in that?

And he also thinks like a child.

I can't wait for his mug to get off the daily headlines.

[ProudModerate2]

I take it they will be primarily 'observing' black and Hispanic voters.

Of course that is what it means.
trump is basically advocating for some of his supporters to intimidate and discourage as many people as possible (Clinton supporters), from actually casting a vote.

[ProudModerate2]

It might be voter intimidation, but it may be valid. I don't know. People should not be voting 15 times a day. Voting needs to be truthful and fair. Period. Dead people should not be voting.

Trump not-so-subtly implying that Hillary is telling her people to vote for her 15 times:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ahhhhhh..
So this is where bronz4141 picked-up this "15 times" bulls**t.
I thought that someone quoting a very large number like "15" was odd.
bronze4141, you are being naïve if you believe in every stupid little thing that trump says.
Don't go out and start repeating his words like a parrot, otherwise you are going to look just as foolish as the orange-haired clown.
.... "15 times" .... LOL.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

It might be voter intimidation, but it may be valid. I don't know. People should not be voting 15 times a day. Voting needs to be truthful and fair. Period. Dead people should not be voting.

Trump not-so-subtly implying that Hillary is telling her people to vote for her 15 times:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ahhhhhh..
So this is where bronz4141 picked-up this "15 times" bulls**t.
I thought that someone quoting a very large number like "15" was odd.
bronze4141, you are being naïve if you believe in every stupid little thing that trump says.
Don't go out and start repeating his words like a parrot, otherwise you are going to look just as foolish as the orange-haired clown.
.... "15 times" .... LOL.

How do you know, that it wasn't the other way around?

[NOVA Green]

It might be voter intimidation, but it may be valid. I don't know. People should not be voting 15 times a day. Voting needs to be truthful and fair. Period. Dead people should not be voting.

try again

Voter fraud does exist. It may be rare, but it exists. I've heard stories of dead people voting. It was on the news. You still shouldn't vote 15 times. Come on, bro.

Well you are correct in that there is a massive epidemic of dead people voting in modern elections, although not perhaps in the sense in which you intended.

This huge problem exists because of early voting, absentee voting, and vote-by-mail systems, whereby individuals cast their ballots, and then have the unintentional misfortune of becoming deceased prior to election day.

I suspect that this phenomenon likely impacts both parties relatively equally, although perhaps gives the Republicans a slight edge in elections where they are winning large chunks of the 65+ vote.

Now, I would say that we can't really consider this voter fraud, since possibly outside a small handful of isolated incidents, it is extremely unlikely that an individual deliberately intends to be deceased prior to election day.

[Mallow]

Oh not this s**t again. ACORN had a handful of people who were doing voter registration fraud where they were filling out false voter registrations in order to meet the quotas that had been set by their supervisors at the organization. That is entirely different from actual election fraud. It had no impact on the actual vote totals on election day. No one was showing up and voting claiming that they were Mickey Mouse.

I notice bronz responded to other posts after this, but never acknowledged this one. I guess it's tough to acknowledge when you're utterly wrong about something.

[IceAgeComing]

I saw a video posted on youtube by the ABC a while back talking about voting fraud in Australia which might be relevant to this discussion.  Basically they found that the vast majority of reported multiple votes were clerical errors (I assume confusion over people with similar names; possibly people ticking off the wrong person at the polls as well, I don't know) while the small remainder was usually confused older people who generally lived in nursing homes and the like - there because of compulsory voting they have mobile polling stations that go to elderly people in unfortunate situations and allow them to vote, and in some cases the family of those people also take them to the polls on polling day because they didn't know that their folks voted early.  Voter ID isn't going to solve that problem really: the only solution is either to create some system to link together polling places and early voting centres to make sure that people aren't voting twice but that presents a different problem if someone is accidentally marked off.  Now Australia is different to America (the biggest difference is compulsory voting, although they probably are closer than most countries in that Australia has significant advance voting which lots of countries don't have: plus there you can go to any polling place in your constituency to vote rather than one specific one) but I think that the general principles apply - that multiple voting or fraud is a minuscule proportion of total votes, the reported numbers probably are exaggerated because of admin errors and that any remainder is people voting twice accidentally and individuals basically voting twice just because they can rather than orchestrated plans by shadowy organisations to elect.  Besides; most races aren't close enough for it to be a factor; and if it is that close then in most countries the courts would end up calling for a revote if it was that close and irregularities (which would include other things like provisional ballots and questions over spoiled votes) could have changed the winner.

No western democracy has a significant issue with voting fraud, despite all the different systems that they have.  Besides; voter ID doesn't solve the problem with multiple voting: the people that are doing that have ways of doing that which wouldn't be beaten by photo ID - besides, if there were they groups trying to fiddle an election I'm sure they'd have a way to give their people fake IDs that'd fool poll workers.  Although I don't know how voting in America works that well: here you're linked to a single polling station that you must vote at and we don't have early voting so you either vote by post or vote in person on the day: I know that America has early voting as well which complicates things especially if they aren't linked to individual polling places.

e: Here's that video that I'm talking about, I found it quite interesting.  Again its Australia; but I think that the general principles apply to other democracies.