Voter suppresion/"stealing the election" megathread (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 02:39:32 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  Voter suppresion/"stealing the election" megathread (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Voter suppresion/"stealing the election" megathread  (Read 144892 times)
IceAgeComing
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,581
United Kingdom


« on: December 08, 2020, 11:45:24 PM »

What does Trump mean when he talks about the signatures in Georgia?
When absentee ballots are processed, the signatures on the envelopes they arrive in are compared to the signatures on voter registration files. Only if there is a "match" is the ballot legitimate.

After matching, the envelopes are opened and the ballot itself is seperated from the envelope with the signatures to ensure voter secrecy.

Then the actual ballots are counted.

Trump wants to go back and rematch signatures, which is impossible since the ballots and the signatures are seperated after signature verification.

So basically, it is a completely ridiculous bad faith argument from Trump and his cronies. All they care about is making it seem like the election was fraudulent.
The signatures were not matched in accord with Georgia statute.

If large numbers of ballots were unlawfully accepted it could have affected the outcome of the election. Assuming ballots were fraudulently cast, the ballots would likely tilt one way. It would taint the result of the election, regardless whether you can identify the ballots.

You are the one making the bad faith argument:

You are arguing that even if it is determined that a crime was committed, that since we can not know who committed it, or what the effect of the crime was.



The issue is that they haven't presented any evidence that fraud happened at all: never mind on a scale required to change the results of the election.  If you seek to change the results of an election or to seek a re-run its not about presenting the potential of irregularities; you have to prove that they happened and that the number of affected votes could theoretically have changed the election.  Its not as simple as "well don't count mail in ballots" since that would disenfranchise those that voted legally: they'd need to find 12,000 votes that were counted illegally (or indeed 12,000 that were not counted that should have been) and present that if they sought to change things.  They haven't because they can't prove that happened and so the election result must stand: you can't overturn the result of a democratic vote just based on the potential that fraud happened since that would go against the basic principle that unless proven otherwise we trust that our elections are free and fair.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 9 queries.