One in five admit violations of election law, such as filling out the forms for a family member.
It's illegal and it's problematic. It may or may not be "fraud".
Suppose the head of a large cult-ish family collects all the mail ballots of his wives and daughters and makes sure nobody in his household ever votes for a "pro-choice candidate". He votes his way on their ballots. That would be fraud, right?
Suppose the head nurse at a care facility walks around and talks to each of the infirm patients unable to manage a pencil, and marks up all their ballots just as they direct -- without fear or favor or any distortion. That turns out to be illegal too, but I would suggest it is NOT "fraudulent" since there is no deception involved.
Any law represents an imperfect compromise that already has had advocates in the legislature and courts debate and game out many such scenarios. I suggest we can follow the law. And we can condemn lawbreakers for their actual actions without invoking malicious evil intent.
Something's wrong with this story. Not that there couldn't have been a good deal of fraud--when you remove accountability that's pretty much inevitable.
But that one in five would be willing to admit to it seems unlikely. Pretty much everybody knows voting in the wrong region is a crime. Even if everybody had done so, how would 17% be willing to admit they committed a crime?
2) They’re proud of it, and believe that the powerful are on their side. They saved the world and want you to know it, secure in the knowledge that they will be protected by the all those powers who support and approve of them.
Also, if the question just asked if they filled out a ballot for someone else, they may not have realized that was illegal. E.g., if a husband filled out a ballot for his wife, or a woman for her aged mother, they may not have realized they were breaking the law.
Neo also posted on this survey and among her observations was that a greater percentage of self-identified Republicans admitted to signing a ballot with another person's name or voting in a state where they didn't reside, raising suspicion that some of the respondents might be answering falsely to enhance perception of fraud during the 2020 election.
By the way, there is electronic documentation of a Wisconsin "mule" stopping dozens of times at a vote drop-box in Milwaukee. Almost all those stops happened at night.
Trump allegedly lost by only 20K votes of over 3 million.....
By the way, there is electronic documentation of a Wisconsin "mule" stopping dozens of times at a vote drop-box in Milwaukee. Almost all those stops happened at night.
Dinesh D'Souza's 2000 Mules, in both movie and book form, discussed this very issue. Not just in Wisconsin. I recommend the book because it has rebuttals of criticisms of the movie.
There are always multiple issues happening with election integrity questions. First, when the election is 51-49, but the 49 finds a way to jockey the system, we can't really say that "the will of the people was thwarted." The Will of the People was divided.
Nonetheless, there are deeper issues about election integrity that may be larger in the long run than the ephemeral issues of who won this particular election, even one as large as the actual presidency. Everyone who votes needs to have reasonable assurance that their ballot counts for very nearly its face value. Everyone in a town, city, county, and ultimately a state needs to know that the the election authorities have more than approximate control over ballots and totals.
I believe that the number of Biden votes were in the end enough to win the various states, and the Trump challenges fall short. We probably elected the correct candidate. However, I think in the medium term the undeserved and falsely-acquired votes were damaging enough to the political process that we will not easily recover.
10 comments:
One in five admit violations of election law, such as filling out the forms for a family member.
It's illegal and it's problematic. It may or may not be "fraud".
Suppose the head of a large cult-ish family collects all the mail ballots of his wives and daughters and makes sure nobody in his household ever votes for a "pro-choice candidate". He votes his way on their ballots. That would be fraud, right?
Suppose the head nurse at a care facility walks around and talks to each of the infirm patients unable to manage a pencil, and marks up all their ballots just as they direct -- without fear or favor or any distortion. That turns out to be illegal too, but I would suggest it is NOT "fraudulent" since there is no deception involved.
Any law represents an imperfect compromise that already has had advocates in the legislature and courts debate and game out many such scenarios. I suggest we can follow the law. And we can condemn lawbreakers for their actual actions without invoking malicious evil intent.
Something's wrong with this story. Not that there couldn't have been a good deal of fraud--when you remove accountability that's pretty much inevitable.
But that one in five would be willing to admit to it seems unlikely. Pretty much everybody knows voting in the wrong region is a crime. Even if everybody had done so, how would 17% be willing to admit they committed a crime?
Two reasons:
1) It’s anonymous, so there’s no risk.
2) They’re proud of it, and believe that the powerful are on their side. They saved the world and want you to know it, secure in the knowledge that they will be protected by the all those powers who support and approve of them.
Also, if the question just asked if they filled out a ballot for someone else, they may not have realized that was illegal. E.g., if a husband filled out a ballot for his wife, or a woman for her aged mother, they may not have realized they were breaking the law.
Neo also posted on this survey and among her observations was that a greater percentage of self-identified Republicans admitted to signing a ballot with another person's name or voting in a state where they didn't reside, raising suspicion that some of the respondents might be answering falsely to enhance perception of fraud during the 2020 election.
https://www.thenewneo.com/2023/12/13/self-admitted-voter-fraud/
It could be that the story has places for skepticism. It’s also true that not nearly 20% in mail in ballots was needed.
not nearly 20% in mail in ballots was needed.
^^^^^^^
THIS
By the way, there is electronic documentation of a Wisconsin "mule" stopping dozens of times at a vote drop-box in Milwaukee. Almost all those stops happened at night.
Trump allegedly lost by only 20K votes of over 3 million.....
By the way, there is electronic documentation of a Wisconsin "mule" stopping dozens of times at a vote drop-box in Milwaukee. Almost all those stops happened at night.
Dinesh D'Souza's 2000 Mules, in both movie and book form, discussed this very issue. Not just in Wisconsin. I recommend the book because it has rebuttals of criticisms of the movie.
There are always multiple issues happening with election integrity questions. First, when the election is 51-49, but the 49 finds a way to jockey the system, we can't really say that "the will of the people was thwarted." The Will of the People was divided.
Nonetheless, there are deeper issues about election integrity that may be larger in the long run than the ephemeral issues of who won this particular election, even one as large as the actual presidency. Everyone who votes needs to have reasonable assurance that their ballot counts for very nearly its face value. Everyone in a town, city, county, and ultimately a state needs to know that the the election authorities have more than approximate control over ballots and totals.
I believe that the number of Biden votes were in the end enough to win the various states, and the Trump challenges fall short. We probably elected the correct candidate. However, I think in the medium term the undeserved and falsely-acquired votes were damaging enough to the political process that we will not easily recover.
Post a Comment