OK, now we descend into the STOLEN election

[mpcook]

Department of Homeland Security calls election "the most secure in American history"

https://www.axios.com/cisa-election-sec ... rBis96PMg

Maybe more typical Trump hyperbole?

[mpcook]

One more....

Handing Over the Reins
by Ilene Bauer (primetimerhyme)

Handing over the reins is, of course,
Very rarely involving a horse.
It’s about the tradition
Of easing transition
Of power, with no show of force.
The expression is mostly applied
When a leader is stepping aside
And helps he who comes next
Not feel lacking or vexed
With all negative feelings denied.
Yet today, those same reins are held tight,
While the whole world is watching this plight.
It’s an ugly impasse
Lacking candor and class
Led by one who is driven by spite.

[rkawakami]

There's a lot in the post I could reply to, but I choose only this one since this goes beyond Trump - it is a claim I often see raised against the government in Israel, and probably in either countries too.

Can you try to understand that some people actually disagree with you that his policies are screwing the country? That some people actually think his policies are good? We have a couple of those in this very thread, so it shouldn't be too difficult to believe.

Oh yes, I quite understand that almost half of this country probably disagrees with me on this point; at least the ones who can and did vote last week. Frankly, I'm surprised that there are over 71M of them. I am glad that this was the best voter turnout in over a century. I do have to give Trump credit for that. He made me a voter in 2016 after not being one for 41 years. 5-6 years ago I would have never waded into these conversations.

To get this back (somewhat) on topic...

CNN now joins FOX in calling Arizona as a Biden win (better late than never I guess). Trump and his team has to reverse PA and one other state in order to get Biden below 270. If GA goes Blue, he'll need recount victories in three states to prevail. If the Reps can actually find out how the Dems cheated, in multiple states, with mostly Republicans at the controls, I'd say it would be the biggest discovery since Leif Eriksson "discovered" America. Yeah, I buy into the notion that Columbus was beat several hundred years by a Viking. Of course the Native Americans here at the time would dispute that.

[dr_st]

We all very well understand people "think his policies are good", e.g. because they see their own tax going down.

Just assuming that people "on the other side" are simple-minded and not as sophisticated as you, and so you understand them "very well", but they are obviously incapable of understanding your "superior" reasoning does not usually make it so.

Frankly, I'm surprised that there are over 71M of them.

Over 72M and counting. Meanwhile Biden is almost at 78M and will surely get there. And I assure you that the Trump voters are just as surprised that 78M Americans voted for Biden. Maybe that's why they so readily assume fraud?

I'd say it would be the biggest discovery since Leif Eriksson "discovered" America. Yeah, I buy into the notion that Columbus was beat several hundred years by a Viking. Of course the Native Americans here at the time would dispute that.

I was under the impression that it's generally undisputed that Leif Erikson had indeed reached continental America, just not the same part that Columbus later did.

[ajkula66]

We all very well understand people "think his policies are good", e.g. because they see their own tax going down.

If that were the only reason, Trump wouldn't get anywhere near as many votes as he did.

So now, do the math and see who is screwed is who is not

On a somewhat-related-note given your location, didn't France ban mail-in-voting back in 1975 exactly due to fraud concerns ?

I was under the impression that it's generally undisputed that Leif Erikson had indeed reached continental America, just not the same part that Columbus later did.

Who cares ? I don't get a day off in October for a holiday bearing his name, so Mr. Erikson may as well have never existed...

[TonyJZX]

I wonder why they have failed in 19 seperate voting legal challenges so far...

[rkawakami]

One could say that they don't have a legal leg to stand on. Or 19 legs.

ref: https://www.propublica.org/article/the- ... its-trying
ref: https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/13/politics ... index.html
ref: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/1 ... ign-436418

CNN has projected a Biden win in Georgia: https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/resul ... tional_map

306 Biden to 232 Trump. Why do those numbers sound so familiar?

On yeah, https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5259 ... oral-votes

[TonyJZX]

[

Frankly, I'm surprised that there are over 71M of them.

Over 72M and counting. Meanwhile Biden is almost at 78M and will surely get there. And I assure you that the Trump voters are just as surprised that 78M Americans voted for Biden. Maybe that's why they so readily assume fraud?

I'm not surprised there's 71 mil. people who like Trump. A lot of people of a certain character like their characteristics amped up to the max.

However its easy to explain why 78mil. people voted for Biden... its abundantly clear... surely many people like him... many people are ambivalent... however many voted for him because they hate the other guy. Admit that a lot of both sides is a protest vote.

You may as well ask why 63 mil. voted for Clinton. No one likes her but they HATE the other guy. Why did he only get 60 mil.?

I like it how people think that 71 mil votes for one guy is a-ok but 78 mil. votes for a run of the mill avg. white centrist is unusual. Is it though? No LOL at all.

[ajkula66]

Admit that a lot of both sides is a protest vote.

I would argue that a huge chunk of Biden vote is actually an anti-Trump vote and that the reverse does not hold true to the same extent. No, I don't have any verifiable data to back that claim up.

You may as well ask why 63 mil. voted for Clinton. No one likes her but they HATE the other guy. Why did he only get 60 mil.?

A lot of Dem voters stayed home for that election because of how Sanders was treated. Hindsight is always 20/20, but I believe to this day that he would've beaten Trump in 2016 had he been given a chance. The portion of Sanders voters that ended up voting for Trump back then - for a variety of reasons - is not insignificant.

[TonyJZX]

In 2016 many people thought that Clinton had it in the bag and they stayed home.

This time 'round people were scared... on both sides.

However let's just say that the Biden side was more scared than the Trump side. And that just about says it all. For many this was an existential crisis and they didnt like the descent into something that's not authoritarian.

Throughout all this I suppose there's a still a lot who think that Trump wouldnt go away quietly or without violence. A lot of idiots.

[dr_st]

A lot of Dem voters stayed home for that election because of how Sanders was treated. Hindsight is always 20/20, but I believe to this day that he would've beaten Trump in 2016 had he been given a chance. The portion of Sanders voters that ended up voting for Trump back then - for a variety of reasons - is not insignificant.

Dunno. I actually think Sanders is too extreme even for many Dem voters. I'd say if he had been running instead of Biden, Trump would have won again, despite how everything was stacked against him.

[Ibthink]

Dunno. I actually think Sanders is too extreme even for many Dem voters. I'd say if he had been running instead of Biden, Trump would have won again, despite how everything was stacked against him.

This year, probably yes - I think for the 2016 election, Sanders probably could have won it against Trump, as he might have been able to carry the Rust Belt states that were decisive. The 2016 election had a different dynamic than this one and one of the reasons why Trump won is that he wasn't a political insider like Hillary - of all the democratic candidates, Sanders would have fit that role best.

I would argue that a huge chunk of Biden vote is actually an anti-Trump vote and that the reverse does not hold true to the same extent. No, I don't have any verifiable data to back that claim up.

In a way, yes, I would agree. However, I think a major motivation for people who vote for Trump is because he "owns the libs". He is a big symbolical middle finger. So indirectly, it also is a protest vote.

[ajkula66]

Dunno. I actually think Sanders is too extreme even for many Dem voters. I'd say if he had been running instead of Biden, Trump would have won again, despite how everything was stacked against him.

This year, probably yes - I think for the 2016 election, Sanders probably could have won it against Trump, as he might have been able to carry the Rust Belt states that were decisive. The 2016 election had a different dynamic than this one and one of the reasons why Trump won is that he wasn't a political insider like Hillary - of all the democratic candidates, Sanders would have fit that role best.

Both you and I should play lottery today, Ibthink, since we actually agreed on something for once...

[pkiff]

Returning to the question of the legitimacy of the election results, I continue to try to read stories and keep track of "both sides" of this issue. But as individual state results become more definitive, and as more election fraud court cases get decided or dismissed, I think the claims of a stolen election become harder to sustain.

Is there a point where the very understandable, very American desire for free and fair elections meets up with the belief amongst many Republicans that the courts should not play an "activist" role in the U.S. system? At this point, barring the discovery of very dramatic new evidence, wouldn't a judge who tried to reverse the election results be almost obstructing the will of the people? Or actively contributing to destabilizing the state of the U.S.A.? From where I sit (in another country looking in!), the numbers are now overwhelming. Even if one could prove fraud in one particular case that reversed the result of one particular state, it would still not change who was elected.

Have Americans permanently lost faith in their entire election process? If not all Americans, perhaps roughly half of them? I guess this would be just one more institution that you've lost faith in over the past 4-8 years. But I wonder how the country moves forward if its people view so many of its critical democratic institutions as corrupted and failing.

Indeed, I worry what it means not just for the future of America, but for the future of Canada and the rest of the world.

[rkawakami]

My take on this is that this is a result of the "cult of personality" which surrounds Trump. He has whipped his base into believing anything and everything he says. The conservative media, mainly Fox News up until last week, has amplified his voice (it looks like Fox has now been replaced by OANN and Newsmax as his favorite outlets). The majority of the Republican party has gone along with Trump because they have been able to tick some agenda items off their list (tax breaks for the rich and corporations, firmly swinging the SCOTUS to the conservative side, appointing conservative federal judges).

Maybe the GOP will regain some normalcy once Trump leaves. Mitch McConnell is a shrewd politician. He has used Trump to get what he wanted. He has flipped from once actively trying to block Trump's election, to now trying to keep him in office despite the Electoral College votes. He's doing that to fire up Trump's base in GA. If it turns out that the Georgia Senate is won by the two Democrats in the runoff elections in January, then the Dems will control Congress (50-50 split with Vice President-elect Kamala Harris breaking any ties). The GOP's power does not reside in the Oval Office. It's in the Senate majority leader's chair.

The people have spoken. Barring at least THREE states reversing their vote count AND the extremely small prospect of encountering faithless electors in December, we will have a 46th POTUS. Whether or not 45 gets escorted out of the White House like a trespasser or he leaves on his own accord, I would hope that the rest of the world starts breathing easier after January 20th.

ref: https://markets.businessinsider.com/new ... 1029798530
ref: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/13/georgia ... sults.html
ref: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pl ... d-the-gop/
ref: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/p ... party.html

[TonyJZX]

One of the problems is a certain side has been pushing for this "stolen election" thing 4yrs ago. So one side is peddling nonsense and further, there's been significant moves to suppress votes long before the last four year so what did you really expect?

Low information voters (which I think is euphemism for something else) will swallow that up.

I also have issues largely with how people flock to a demagogue. If you're at a point where you tattoo Joe Biden's name on your chest then its not politics any more is it? Oh it wasnt Joe? Funny that.

I wonder at what point people will turn? I wonder where the legal battles will go in say February.

[cadillacmike68]

The vast majority of so called "low information voters" are the ones who voted for biden.

The legal battles will all be over by Dec 14.

[RealBlackStuff]

You mean the TRUMPed-up legal battles about voting.
The REAL legal battles will start after 20 January 2021, when Trump can no longer hide behind presidential immunity.
They will very soon run out of lines to hang all his dirty laundry on.

[TonyJZX]

he conceded already in a completely dignified manner

as people have said, the only way to 270 is if he loses 50 pounds

with guiliani at the helm i think there's a slim hope of winning the legal battle

[cadillacmike68]

OK, so now we KNOW that the wuhan china coronavirus was in Italy in SEP 2019. I knew it was as early as OCT, but now it's confirmed. and of course, iran and other mideast oil suppliers to china probably had it running around in their countries back then too, and possibly here as well, but only in large tourist areas at first. That's how it got in and it then spread.

How did that Led Zeppelin song go? "It makes me wonder"...

Georgia hand recount still going on but they are NOT verifying signatures. WTF???

You mean the TRUMPed-up legal battles about voting.
The REAL legal battles will start after 20 January 2021, when Trump can no longer hide behind presidential immunity.
They will very soon run out of lines to hang all his dirty laundry on.

Let me know how that works out.

[BillMorrow]

So exactly HOW does a voting machine "flip" votes.

...
...
...
...
...

That's right, it was PROGRAMMED to do so!

Thew manual recount in GA will tell us.

Needs to be ones in NV, AZ. And in WI, MI, PA after illegal votes are culled first.

the cheaters are smart, they separated the mail in ballots from the envelopes..

i don't think the manual recount in GA WILL tell us all.. only some..
news today is 2000 votes were not entered or something..
more might be on the way.. i have a LOT to add, but its 4am now..
good discussion but it reveals that the news and media have been very good at their mis-information and outright lying..
what is it now..? 80% of americans do NOT trust the media..?! print and broadcast and most cable..
there was mUCH in ray's post i would argue but time is not my friend just now..

[mpcook]

...
Georgia hand recount still going on but they are NOT verifying signatures. WTF???
...

Not correct, fake news off the twitter. Twitter is not news.

ATLANTA (AP) — President Donald Trump has wrongly claimed that Georgia election officials are unable to verify signatures on absentee ballot envelopes because of a legal settlement known as a consent decree.

Here’s a look at Trump’s claims, in a tweet on Saturday:

TRUMP: “The Consent Decree signed by the Georgia Secretary of State, with the approval of Governor @BrianKempGA, at the urging of @staceyabrams, makes it impossible to check & match signatures on ballots and envelopes, etc. They knew they were going to cheat. Must expose real signatures!”

THE FACTS: There is nothing in the consent decree that prevents Georgia election clerks from scrutinizing signatures. The legal settlement signed in March addresses accusations about a lack of statewide standards for judging signatures on absentee ballot envelopes.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, said that not only is it entirely possible to match signatures, but that the state requires it.

When a voter requests an absentee ballot on a paper application, he or she must sign it. Election officials compare that signature to the signature in voter registration files before a ballot is sent to the voter, Raffensperger said.

When those ballots are returned, the required signature on the outer envelope is compared to signatures in the voter registration system.

This process was spelled out in detail in the consent decree, a legal settlement that was signed March 6.

A lawsuit by the Democratic Party, which led to the agreement, argued that minorities were disproportionately affected when they had their ballots rejected. Among other things, the settlement sets steps for local election officials to notify a voter -- by phone, mail or email -- in a timely fashion about problems with a signature.

The changes were made by the state election board.

Following state law, Georgia is pursuing a hand tally of votes in the presidential race. Democrat Joe Biden leads Trump by about 14,000 votes in the state. There are no examples of similar recounts that have overturned leads of that magnitude.

The signature issue resurfaced after lawyer L. Lin Wood Jr. filed a federal lawsuit Friday questioning whether the secretary of state had the authority to require the process of signature verification outlined in the agreement.

Wood is known for representing several high-profile clients including security guard Richard Jewell, who was identified as a suspect of the 1996 Centennial Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta but later cleared.

[BillMorrow]

I'd say it would be the biggest discovery since Leif Eriksson "discovered" America. Yeah, I buy into the notion that Columbus was beat several hundred years by a Viking. Of course the Native Americans here at the time would dispute that.

I was under the impression that it's generally undisputed that Leif Erikson had indeed reached continental America, just not the same part that Columbus later did.

uhmmm, is it not true that the "Americas" were first "discovered" by semi-oriental wanderers from africa crossing over the land bridge between siberia and alaska..? well before siberia and alaska were names and before the continental drift and sea levels changed things..? who then became the "native americans" aka "american indians", incas et al..?

[dr_st]

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, said that not only is it entirely possible to match signatures, but that the state requires it.

When a voter requests an absentee ballot on a paper application, he or she must sign it. Election officials compare that signature to the signature in voter registration files before a ballot is sent to the voter, Raffensperger said.

When those ballots are returned, the required signature on the outer envelope is compared to signatures in the voter registration system.

So, I have a technical question about this, since I am not sure I understand properly how things work with mail-in / absentee voting.

The idea as I see it is that there is a double envelope - the outside envelope with the voter's identification information, signature, etc. This is validated against the signature, the voter registration DB, etc, to ensure that the vote is valid. Once this is checked, the inner envelope is taken out, and added to the pile, separate from the voter's information (to ensure anonymity). I think it's called pre-canvassing?

Suppose that someone "flopped on the job" during the pre-canvassing stage, and didn't properly verify that the vote was valid. How can you possibly find that out during a later recount?

[BillMorrow]

found on facebook..
wish i had said it:

The clown in the White House just brokered two Middle East Peace Accords, something that 71 years of political intervention and endless war failed to produce.
The buffoon in the White House is the first president that has not engaged us in a foreign war since Eisenhower.
The clown in the White House has had the greatest impact on the economy, bringing jobs, and lowering unemployment to the Black and Latino population of ANY other president. Ever.
The buffoon in the White House has exposed the deep, widespread, and long-standing corruption in the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and the Republican and Democratic parties.
The buffoon in the White House turned NATO around and had them start paying their dues.
The clown in the White House neutralized the North Koreans, stopped them from developing a further nuclear capability, sending missiles toward Japan, and threatening the West Coast of the US.
The clown in the White House turned our relationship with the Chinese around, brought hundreds of business back to the US, and revived the economy. Hello!!!!!!!
The clown in the White House has accomplished the appointing of three Supreme Court Justices and close to 300 Federal Judges.
This same clown in the White House lowered your taxes, increased the standard deduction on your IRS return from $12,500 for Married Filing Joint to $24,400 and caused your stock market to move to record levels over 100 times, positively impacting the retirements of tens of millions of citizens.
The clown in the White House fast-tracked the development of a COVID Vaccine - it will be available within weeks - we still don't have a vaccine for SARS, Bird Flu, Ebola, or a host of diseases that arose during previous administrations.
The clown in the White House rebuilt our military which the Obama administration had crippled and had fired 214 key generals and admirals in his first year of office.
This clown in the White House uncovered widespread pedophilia in the government and in Hollywood, and is exposing world wide sex trafficking of minors and bringing children home to their families.
The clown in the White House works for free and has lost well over 2 billion dollars of his own money in serving - and done all of this and much more in the face of relentless undermining and opposition from people who are threatened because they know they are going to be exposed as the criminals that they are if he is re-elected.
I got it, you don't like him. Many of you utterly hate and despise him. He is serving you and ALL the American people. What are you doing besides calling him names and laughing about him catching the China virus ?????
And please educate me again as to what Biden has accomplished for America in his 47 years in office?
I’ll take a ‘clown’ any day versus a fork tongued, smooth talking hypocritical corrupt liar. Please let it be known, I am not sure I would even want to be his friend. I want a strong leader who isn’t afraid to Stand up when needed. I don’t need a fatherly figure - I already have one. I don’t need a liar - that's what Hollywood and CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS and the New York Times are for.
I don’t need someone to help me, but I also don’t want an obstacle or a demented, senile washed-up Swamp Monster.
God bless Donald Trump - the most unappreciated President in history.

[BillMorrow]

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, said that not only is it entirely possible to match signatures, but that the state requires it.

When a voter requests an absentee ballot on a paper application, he or she must sign it. Election officials compare that signature to the signature in voter registration files before a ballot is sent to the voter, Raffensperger said.

When those ballots are returned, the required signature on the outer envelope is compared to signatures in the voter registration system.

So, I have a technical question about this, since I am not sure I understand properly how things work with mail-in / absentee voting.

The idea as I see it is that there is a double envelope - the outside envelope with the voter's identification information, signature, etc. This is validated against the signature, the voter registration DB, etc, to ensure that the vote is valid. Once this is checked, the inner envelope is taken out, and added to the pile, separate from the voter's information (to ensure anonymity). I think it's called pre-canvassing?

Suppose that someone "flopped on the job" during the pre-canvassing stage, and didn't properly verify that the vote was valid. How can you possibly find that out during a later recount?

as i understand from tucker and hannity et al reporting, the sec. of state of GA signed a consent decree with stacy abrams (via some lawsuit settlement thing) that there would ONLY be signature varification with the ballot and the ballot request which leaves open the ability to apply for a ballot without verification of the original voter registration signature..
thus anyone could apply for an absentee ballot, sign the application, get the ballot, vote and sign the ballot all without verifying it was the same person who registered to vote..

[dr_st]

found on facebook..
wish i had said it:

I’ll take a ‘clown’ any day versus a fork tongued, smooth talking hypocritical corrupt liar. Please let it be known, I am not sure I would even want to be his friend. I want a strong leader who isn’t afraid to Stand up when needed. I don’t need a fatherly figure - I already have one. I don’t need a liar - that's what Hollywood and CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS and the New York Times are for.

I took the liberty of quoting just the statement, which I found the most important, as everything else pretty much follows from it.

as i understand from tucker and hannity et al reporting, the sec. of state of GA signed a consent decree with stacy abrams (via some lawsuit settlement thing) that there would ONLY be signature varification with the ballot and the ballot request which leaves open the ability to apply for a ballot without verification of the original voter registration signature..
thus anyone could apply for an absentee ballot, sign the application, get the ballot, vote and sign the ballot all without verifying it was the same person who registered to vote..

If this is true, then I can certainly see the problems this can lead to, but I'm still curious about the answer to my question.

[mpcook]

as i understand from tucker and hannity et al reporting, the sec. of state of GA signed a consent decree with stacy abrams (via some lawsuit settlement thing) that there would ONLY be signature varification with the ballot and the ballot request which leaves open the ability to apply for a ballot without verification of the original voter registration signature..
thus anyone could apply for an absentee ballot, sign the application, get the ballot, vote and sign the ballot all without verifying it was the same person who registered to vote..

More fake news....Georgia checks your signature before even sending you a ballot, and then checks it again when they received your ballot. The Georgia Secretary of State's Office actually added an extra signature matching step this year.

Georgia's laws require county election workers to check the signature when they first get an absentee ballot in the mail or from a drop box.

The actual law itself reads: "The registrar or clerk shall then compare the identifying information on the oath with the information on file in his or her office, shall compare the signature or mark on the oath with the signature or mark on the absentee elector's application for absentee ballot."

Basically, you request an absentee ballot, and you sign an oath affirming you are who you say you are on the envelope you put that ballot in, and then you send it to the county election office. The worker there takes it, checks your signature to verify you are who you say you are, and then sends it along to be counted. That's how signature matching happens in Georgia in its most basic form.

Now, the Georgia Secretary of State's Office actually added a signature matching step this year: When you requested an absentee ballot, they required a signature on your absentee ballot request form (or, if you requested it online, made you submit your driver's license number when you made the request through the Secretary of State's online portal).

So they checked your signature before even sending you a ballot, and then checked it again when they received your ballot.

[rkawakami]

found on facebook..
wish i had said it:

The clown in the White House just brokered two Middle East Peace Accords, something that 71 years of political intervention and endless war failed to produce.
<snip>

You had me at "clown" .

Source of the material came from the Conservative News Daily.

[BillMorrow]

as i understand from tucker and hannity et al reporting, the sec. of state of GA signed a consent decree with stacy abrams (via some lawsuit settlement thing) that there would ONLY be signature varification with the ballot and the ballot request which leaves open the ability to apply for a ballot without verification of the original voter registration signature..
thus anyone could apply for an absentee ballot, sign the application, get the ballot, vote and sign the ballot all without verifying it was the same person who registered to vote..

More fake news....Georgia checks your signature before even sending you a ballot, and then checks it again when they received your ballot. The Georgia Secretary of State's Office actually added an extra signature matching step this year.

Georgia's laws require county election workers to check the signature when they first get an absentee ballot in the mail or from a drop box.

The actual law itself reads: "The registrar or clerk shall then compare the identifying information on the oath with the information on file in his or her office, shall compare the signature or mark on the oath with the signature or mark on the absentee elector's application for absentee ballot."

Basically, you request an absentee ballot, and you sign an oath affirming you are who you say you are on the envelope you put that ballot in, and then you send it to the county election office. The worker there takes it, checks your signature to verify you are who you say you are, and then sends it along to be counted. That's how signature matching happens in Georgia in its most basic form.

Now, the Georgia Secretary of State's Office actually added a signature matching step this year: When you requested an absentee ballot, they required a signature on your absentee ballot request form (or, if you requested it online, made you submit your driver's license number when you made the request through the Secretary of State's online portal).

So they checked your signature before even sending you a ballot, and then checked it again when they received your ballot.

the WHY the reported consent decree won by stacy abrams suit against the state..?
where ONLY the sig on the abs ballot APPLICATION and the ballot itself and NOT the original sig on the original voter reg sometime in the past..?

lets face it, "they" have been at trumps throat since '16 throwing everything and anything they can invent to take him out..
why would this election with hackable voting machines be ANY different..
sure, i cringe at some of his tweets and comments but i sure loved his economy.. and his love of America..