U.S. Supreme Court set to weigh Republican-backed voting restrictions

[Sujo]

2 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Again lets assume you are correct?  What is the objection to having and showing ID which is reasonably expected for unlimited number of less critical things. 

As has been pointed out. Voting is a right. Can you show anything?

[Thomas J]

Just now, Sujo said:

Trump even set up a taskforce, nothing. There is nothing to prevent.

So why the objection to showing id?  Banks set up cameras to prevent robberies, airlines screen baggage to prevent unauthorized objects from entering the plane, brokerage firms require ID to prove identity of those opening accounts.  So what is your specific objection to having to show id.  Whether there is fraud or not, is not the issue.  Why protest so vehemently if there is nothing to hide. 

[Jeffr2]

4 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

So why the objection to showing id?  Banks set up cameras to prevent robberies, airlines screen baggage to prevent unauthorized objects from entering the plane, brokerage firms require ID to prove identity of those opening accounts.  So what is your specific objection to having to show id.  Whether there is fraud or not, is not the issue.  Why protest so vehemently if there is nothing to hide. 

Jeez. Please. Let it go.

[Thomas J]

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

As has been pointed out. Voting is a right. Can you show anything?

I can show you the bill of rights.  Voting is not in them.  However the right to bear arms is number 2 and yet there is no objection to requiring people be a minimum age, not be a criminal, show id upon purchase,  for some purchases requiring a waiting period.  None of those requirements are in the second amendment, but they are all considered "reasonable".  What is the objection to the "reasonable" showing of identification.  The only reason for a person to object is if they are attempting to fraudulently vote.  And just like the ID to purchase the gun, that is an action to prevent a gun from fraudulently being purchases.  

When the constitution was enacted the right to bear arms was included for everyone but voting was restricted to landowners so voting laws and regulations have changed for centuries.  To beat a dead horse, if there is nothing to hide or attempt to fraudulently pursue, no one should object to a "reasonable" identification system.  Certainly the system in Illinois where if I know the persons name, and precinct, I can vote for them without showing ID is not a reasonable method

 

[Sujo]

19 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

I can show you the bill of rights.  Voting is not in them.  However the right to bear arms is number 2 and yet there is no objection to requiring people be a minimum age, not be a criminal, show id upon purchase,  for some purchases requiring a waiting period.  None of those requirements are in the second amendment, but they are all considered "reasonable".  What is the objection to the "reasonable" showing of identification.  The only reason for a person to object is if they are attempting to fraudulently vote.  And just like the ID to purchase the gun, that is an action to prevent a gun from fraudulently being purchases.  

When the constitution was enacted the right to bear arms was included for everyone but voting was restricted to landowners so voting laws and regulations have changed for centuries.  To beat a dead horse, if there is nothing to hide or attempt to fraudulently pursue, no one should object to a "reasonable" identification system.  Certainly the system in Illinois where if I know the persons name, and precinct, I can vote for them without showing ID is not a reasonable method

 

Oh dear. Where is the problem. Anything. You saying there can be issues doesnt make it so.

 

So much off topic. Show me the evidence.

 

Put up or shut up.

Edited March 3, 2021 by Sujo

[Chomper Higgot]

19 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Again lets assume you are correct?  What is the objection to having and showing ID which is reasonably expected for unlimited number of less critical things. 

1. Voting is a right.

 

There any barrier to voting is a barrier to exercising that right.

 

So now let’s deal with your feigned ignorance on why demanding an ID is a problem.

 

11% of American adults of voting age do not possess any form of government issued Photographic/Biometric ID, these people are predominantly poor, Black/other ethnic minority, old or disabled. 

 

Moreover many of these have neither the required supporting documentation to obtain a government photographic/biometric ID, nor the money to obtain this ID.

 

The demographic group with the highest possession of government issued photographic/biometric ID is White Americans.

 

The requirements for a government issued photographic/biometric ID to be permitted to exercise the Constitutional right to vote are therefore demonstrably discriminatory against Black, ethnic minority, poor, old and disabled Americans and equally discriminatory in favor of White Americans.

 

https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet

 

Please read the linked information, inwardly digest and desist from posting your feigned ignorance on this matter.

[Credo]

2 hours ago, Thomas J said:

So why the objection to showing id?  Banks set up cameras to prevent robberies, airlines screen baggage to prevent unauthorized objects from entering the plane, brokerage firms require ID to prove identity of those opening accounts.  So what is your specific objection to having to show id.  Whether there is fraud or not, is not the issue.  Why protest so vehemently if there is nothing to hide. 

The conservatives have made the process of registering to vote an onerous one, now you want to make the actual voting process difficult.  

Just to give you one example, one state, North Dakota, decided that you could only vote if you had a street address. That meant that the people living on the Native American Indian Reservations couldn't vote.  Reservations do not have street addresses.  Mail is sent to a PO Box.   Street addresses are given by the postal service and the reservations have never been given them.   A pretty big chuck of people to deny the right to vote, don't you think?

It's clear that a lot of people want to make sure a lot of people don't get to vote.   

[impulse]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

1. Voting is a right.

 

There any barrier to voting is a barrier to exercising that right.

 

So now let’s deal with your feigned ignorance on why demanding an ID is a problem.

 

11% of American adults of voting age do not possess any form of government issued Photographic/Biometric ID, these people are predominantly poor, Black/other ethnic minority, old or disabled. 

 

So...  How do you keep 'em from voting 2 or 3 times?  Maybe once by mail and 2 or 3 times in person...

 

Unless, of course, you dip their thumb in indelible ink.  Which probably represents yet another voting restriction. 

 

I'd also point out that voting is a right accorder to citizens of legal age.  Without ID, how can you tell who's a citizen or of legal age?

 

You want to fix problems of ID, fix problems of ID.  That's a worthy goal that goes way beyond election day.  But keep election integrity.

 

Besides, the voting restriction referenced in the OP is the barring of organizations from gathering up the votes, deciding which ones to collect, which to submit and which ones to conveniently lose.

 

Edited March 3, 2021 by impulse

[MikeyIdea]

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Mail in voting isn't new in the U S  either. The rules depend on each state. It was justifiably expanded because of the pandemic. Expats and military abroad have always voted by mail. Yankee soldiers in the Civil War voted by mail.

It's s the resistance to mail-in voting for normal citizens that baffles me. It's normal citizen postal voting that Sweden has had for 78 years. 

 

Armed forces has beed allowed Mail in voting for hundreds of years in many democracies. 

[MikeyIdea]

5 hours ago, Thomas J said:

I know the refrain has been there is no election fraud.  Honestly, I don't know how you in a mail in voting system you would ever know or without extensive follow up one on one audits that you could ever uncover it. 

Consider in the USA you register to vote.  However you do not have to update your address if you move.  I am still registered to vote in Michigan despite not having lived there since 2018.  If a person resides in more than one state there is no process to cross check if the person who has a residence lets say in Florida and is registered to vote, also does not have an address in New York and is registered to vote. 

Now a huge number of states have just mailed out absentee ballots to all registered voters.  Now consider the records of those registered voters are very imperfect with numerous people no longer living at an old address, registered at another address, or perhaps deceased.  There is no mechanism to cross check. 

Now consider, with unemployment benefits whose records are also kept by the government.  It is estimated that between 35% and 40% of the claims are fraud.  So how can it be that a huge percentage of applications to get money are fraud but that a miniscule to nonexistent number of votes are fraudulent. 

Now the ballot is received, there is no way to guarantee that the ballot was actually received by the registered voter, and no way to determine if the return ballot was actually filled out by the registered voter. Some states have computer signature verification but like all OCR systems it is fraught with errors. 

 Finally, at polling stations places to vote are to be politics free.  That is those who wish to either support or oppose specific candidates are not permitted to engage with those that vote.  With mail in ballots there is no way to determine if a persons vote was tainted by others through inducement to vote.  

In order to open a bank account you have to show up in person and present ID.  In order to purchase alcohol you have to show up in person and if close to the legal age, show ID. To purchase a firearm you have to show up in person and show an ID.  You can not "pre-board" online to avoid showing an ID to fly on a commercial airline.   Many transactions some as insignificant as verifying a Facebook account require picture ID.  However somehow there is this mantra being preached that voting is not that important, requiring ID is somehow discriminatory, and is voter suppression.   

It is estimated that Medicare fraud totals $415 billion a year, unemployment fraud just with the pandemic relief program is estimated to be $36 billion.  This is old data but a 2013 report by the IRS showed 5  million returns filed with stolen identities.  In 2019 the IRS who should have far better data than they individual states with voter registration mailed out 1 million Covid Relief checks to dead people.  To look at the rampant fraud with other government online systems and not think that fraud exists in voting is ludicrous.  With a fake tax return you might walk away with a few thousand.  With a swung election with trillions of tax dollars as the ultimate prize there is a far greater incentive on the part of some. 

Assuming it could be done, which I think technologically it can, there would be nothing wrong with using fingerprints, retinal scans, or facial recognition systems in lieu of picture ID to verify voters.  While I still would favor in person voting, at least those sorts of systems done online would verify the person placing the vote, was in fact the registered voter, and they could be centralized so a person unlike now can not vote in multiple states. 

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/05/scammers-have-taken-36-billion-in-fraudulent-unemployment-payments-.html
 

America could send people to the moon but they didn't implement a secure postal voting system for normal voters which Sweden has has since the second world war 2? Sounds too backwards to believe. So you say it's as I said? Banana Republic? 

 

It was not difficult to implement during WW2 even, now it's easy

Edited March 3, 2021 by MikeyIdea

[Sujo]

15 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

So...  How do you keep 'em from voting 2 or 3 times?  Maybe once by mail and 2 or 3 times in person...

 

Unless, of course, you dip their thumb in indelible ink.  Which probably represents yet another voting restriction. 

 

I'd also point out that voting is a right accorder to citizens of legal age.  Without ID, how can you tell who's a citizen or of legal age?

 

You want to fix problems of ID, fix problems of ID.  That's a worthy goal that goes way beyond election day.  But keep election integrity.

 

Besides, the voting restriction referenced in the OP is the barring of organizations from gathering up the votes, deciding which ones to collect, which to submit and which ones to conveniently lose.

 

Show us evidence its an issue. It cant be that hard.

[MikeyIdea]

24 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

So...  How do you keep 'em from voting 2 or 3 times?  Maybe once by mail and 2 or 3 times in person...

 

 

I have another question for you. Many other countries solved that 50 years ago, Sweden solved it 78 years ago. Why can't America solve it? 

 

[impulse]

3 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Show us evidence its an issue. It cant be that hard.

 

Here's a few just in Texas.  There are tons more...

 

In 2012, the Donna ISD school board president hung himself after the FBI pressed for an indictment on grounds that he stole his election using fraud.[1]

In 2015, six people were convicted of felony voter fraud in Hildalgo County, Texas for harvesting mail in ballots fraudulently in several local elections.[2]

In the 2016 Republican primary in Hill County, Texas, election officials claimed 9,038 ballots were cast, yet only 7,171 voters actually voted in that election.[3] There were 1,800 votes counted with no voters to go with them, and on that very ballot three races were determined by less that 70 votes.

In 2017, Rosa Ortega (a legal resident) was convicted and sentenced to 8 years in Tarrant County, Texas after she illegally voted for 10 years, although she is not a citizen of the US.[4] The very same year, an Ellis County, Texas constable was removed from office and convicted for having stolen his election using fraud.[5]

In 2018, Tarrant County convicted a felon of illegal voting after she intentionally voted after having been told, in writing, she was not eligible to do so.[6] Just  last week, a judge ordered a new election in Kaufman County, Texas after it was shown in court that fraudulent ballots were improperly counted.[7] I could continue, the list is long – and these are just Texas.

 

http://directactiontx.com/voter-fraud-is-not-realhavent-you-heard/

 

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/east-texas-county-commissioner-accused-vote-harvesting-73265160

 

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/ag-paxton-san-antonio-election-fraudster-arrested-widespread-vote-harvesting-and-fraud

 

[impulse]

23 minutes ago, MikeyIdea said:

I have another question for you. Many other countries solved that 50 years ago, Sweden solved it 78 years ago. Why can't America solve it? 

 

Eezy peezy.  We can do like Sweden and require ID in order to vote.

 

Oh, wait...

 

[Sujo]

53 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Here's a few just in Texas.  There are tons more...

 

In 2012, the Donna ISD school board president hung himself after the FBI pressed for an indictment on grounds that he stole his election using fraud.[1]

In 2015, six people were convicted of felony voter fraud in Hildalgo County, Texas for harvesting mail in ballots fraudulently in several local elections.[2]

In the 2016 Republican primary in Hill County, Texas, election officials claimed 9,038 ballots were cast, yet only 7,171 voters actually voted in that election.[3] There were 1,800 votes counted with no voters to go with them, and on that very ballot three races were determined by less that 70 votes.

In 2017, Rosa Ortega (a legal resident) was convicted and sentenced to 8 years in Tarrant County, Texas after she illegally voted for 10 years, although she is not a citizen of the US.[4] The very same year, an Ellis County, Texas constable was removed from office and convicted for having stolen his election using fraud.[5]

In 2018, Tarrant County convicted a felon of illegal voting after she intentionally voted after having been told, in writing, she was not eligible to do so.[6] Just  last week, a judge ordered a new election in Kaufman County, Texas after it was shown in court that fraudulent ballots were improperly counted.[7] I could continue, the list is long – and these are just Texas.

 

http://directactiontx.com/voter-fraud-is-not-realhavent-you-heard/

 

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/east-texas-county-commissioner-accused-vote-harvesting-73265160

 

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/ag-paxton-san-antonio-election-fraudster-arrested-widespread-vote-harvesting-and-fraud

 

So what the other poster said was untrue. They can find voter fraud.

 

so out of 160 million votes thats all you have.

 

So those are in texas. Remind me who won texas?

[stevenl]

8 hours ago, Thomas J said:

It can't be done because there is no way of ascertaining if the person who turned in the ballot is "REALLY 'the person who is the registered voter.  So by default voter fraud can't be proved because the system as it currently stands does not guarantee the voter on the front end, and since the actual vote is anonymous, no way of determining if it had been altered.  

Consider, the following countries have "biometric" to their voting systems.  What is wrong with a system that guarantees voter integrity.  Fraud or No Fraud.  Just like airport security.  You don't do it because there is a problem.  You do it to prevent a problem.  If these nations many of them third world can employ a system to guarantee their voters integrity in their elections, certainly the US citizens deserve nothing less. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometric_voter_registration#:~:text=Countries which have used Biometric,%2C Iraq%2C Kenya%2C Lesotho%2C

Countries which have used Biometric voting registration include Armenia,^[10][11] Angola,^[12][13] Bangladesh,^[14][15] Bhutan,^[16] Bolivia,^[17][18] Brazil,^[19][20] Burkina Faso,^[21] Cambodia,^[22][23] Cameroon,^[24] Chad,^[25][26] Colombia,^[27][28] Comoros,^[29][30] Congo (Democratic Republic of),^[31][32] Costa Rica,^{[citation needed]} Cote d'Ivoire,^[33] Dominican Republic,^[34] Fiji, Gambia,^[35] Ghana,^[36] Guatemala, India,^[37][38] Iraq, Kenya,^[39][40] Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mexico,^[9][41] Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia,^[42] Nepal,^[43] Nicaragua, Nigeria,^[44][45] Panama, Peru,^[9] The Philippines,^[46][47] Senegal, Sierra Leone,^[48][49] Solomon Islands, Somaliland,^[50] Swaziland, Tanzania,^[51] Uganda,^[52][53] Uruguay, Venezuela,^[9] Yemen,^[54] Zambia,^[55] and Zimbabwe.^[5

 

Nice examples, mirroring yourself to the likes of angola and malawi.

[impulse]

3 hours ago, Sujo said:

So what the other poster said was untrue. They can find voter fraud.

 

so out of 160 million votes thats all you have.

 

So those are in texas. Remind me who won texas?

 

You asked for evidence.  I provided some.  Already adjudicated, complete with convictions.  I could provide more, but that isn't my job, nor will it convince anyone of anything they've already decided.

 

If your contention is that a little bit of voter fraud is okay or that just one side does it, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

 

Edited March 3, 2021 by impulse

[candide]

4 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Here's a few just in Texas.  There are tons more...

 

In 2012, the Donna ISD school board president hung himself after the FBI pressed for an indictment on grounds that he stole his election using fraud.[1]

In 2015, six people were convicted of felony voter fraud in Hildalgo County, Texas for harvesting mail in ballots fraudulently in several local elections.[2]

In the 2016 Republican primary in Hill County, Texas, election officials claimed 9,038 ballots were cast, yet only 7,171 voters actually voted in that election.[3] There were 1,800 votes counted with no voters to go with them, and on that very ballot three races were determined by less that 70 votes.

In 2017, Rosa Ortega (a legal resident) was convicted and sentenced to 8 years in Tarrant County, Texas after she illegally voted for 10 years, although she is not a citizen of the US.[4] The very same year, an Ellis County, Texas constable was removed from office and convicted for having stolen his election using fraud.[5]

In 2018, Tarrant County convicted a felon of illegal voting after she intentionally voted after having been told, in writing, she was not eligible to do so.[6] Just  last week, a judge ordered a new election in Kaufman County, Texas after it was shown in court that fraudulent ballots were improperly counted.[7] I could continue, the list is long – and these are just Texas.

 

http://directactiontx.com/voter-fraud-is-not-realhavent-you-heard/

 

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/east-texas-county-commissioner-accused-vote-harvesting-73265160

 

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/ag-paxton-san-antonio-election-fraudster-arrested-widespread-vote-harvesting-and-fraud

 

(1) Considering the sample includes all types of elections, including primaries, local elections, etc... during 20 years, It's peanuts. Your post confirms voter fraud is not an issue.

(2) you are supposed to argue against not requiring ID, and yet you cite as example a State which requires voter ID. What's the point?

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx

 

BTW, interestingly enough, three out of the four battleground States targeted by Trump in his voter fraud scam do require ID! ????

 

[MikeyIdea]

5 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Eezy peezy.  We can do like Sweden and require ID in order to vote.

 

Oh, wait...

 

 

This is a nobrainer. It's not democracy without a process to confirm identity of the voter. It doesn't have to be ID though, Sweden didn't have photo IDs in 1942.   

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, MikeyIdea said:

 

This is a nobrainer. It's not democracy without a process to confirm identity of the voter. It doesn't have to be ID though, Sweden didn't have photo IDs in 1942.   

Where did you get that from?

 

I’ve never seen that ad the definition of a democracy.

[Chomper Higgot]

10 hours ago, impulse said:

 

So...  How do you keep 'em from voting 2 or 3 times?  Maybe once by mail and 2 or 3 times in person...

 

Unless, of course, you dip their thumb in indelible ink.  Which probably represents yet another voting restriction. 

 

I'd also point out that voting is a right accorder to citizens of legal age.  Without ID, how can you tell who's a citizen or of legal age?

 

You want to fix problems of ID, fix problems of ID.  That's a worthy goal that goes way beyond election day.  But keep election integrity.

 

Besides, the voting restriction referenced in the OP is the barring of organizations from gathering up the votes, deciding which ones to collect, which to submit and which ones to conveniently lose.

 

 

All predicated on the baseless claims of widespread voter fraud.

 

Quit the pretense, purpose of these restrictions is clearly demonstrated by who implements them and who they impact.

 

Republicans targeting Black, ethnic minorities, poor and disabled workers to place barriers in the way of these people exercising their right to vote.

 

It’s always Republicans and they are always targeting Black, ethnic minorities, the poor and disabled to deny them their right to vote.

 

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Chomper Higgot

[Jeffr2]

10 hours ago, impulse said:

 

So...  How do you keep 'em from voting 2 or 3 times?  Maybe once by mail and 2 or 3 times in person...

 

Unless, of course, you dip their thumb in indelible ink.  Which probably represents yet another voting restriction. 

 

I'd also point out that voting is a right accorder to citizens of legal age.  Without ID, how can you tell who's a citizen or of legal age?

 

You want to fix problems of ID, fix problems of ID.  That's a worthy goal that goes way beyond election day.  But keep election integrity.

 

Besides, the voting restriction referenced in the OP is the barring of organizations from gathering up the votes, deciding which ones to collect, which to submit and which ones to conveniently lose.

 

Come on. Stop with the voter fraud nonsense. There will always be fraud. No matter what you do. Luckily, it's not significant. As proven by the recent elections.

 

Stop reading the fake right wing news.

 

The biggest problem now is voter suppression. Driven by the GOP as they know it's the only way they can win. Very undemocratic.

[MikeyIdea]

28 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Where did you get that from?

 

I’ve never seen that ad the definition of a democracy.

 

One part of democracy is the right to vote in fair elections. We can have the right to vote without identifying the voters (somehow, doesn't have to be photo ID) but how do we have fair elections? 

 

China has provincial elections but they are not fair. That's one of the main reasons why China is not a democracy.

 

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by MikeyIdea

[Jeffr2]

Just now, MikeyIdea said:

 

One part of democracy is the right to vote in fair elections. We can have the right to vote without identifying the voters (somehow, doesn't have to be photo ID) but how do we have fair elections? 

 

 

The elections were fair. Sadly, many of the laws for voting are set by the state. Each one has it's own set of laws. Change is desperately needed. As we can see by the gerrymandering attempts by the GOP.

[MikeyIdea]

5 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

The elections were fair. Sadly, many of the laws for voting are set by the state. Each one has it's own set of laws. Change is desperately needed. As we can see by the gerrymandering attempts by the GOP.

 

I totally agree that the US elections were fair. Absolutely. There were over 60 court cases confirming that the elections were fair. 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, MikeyIdea said:

 

One part of democracy is the right to vote in fair elections. We can have the right to vote without identifying the voters (somehow, doesn't have to be photo ID) but how do we have fair elections? 

 

 

 

Yes, one part of democracy is the right to vote in ‘fair elections’.

 

Enacting policies that demonstrably disenfranchise Black, ethnic minority, poor and disabled citizens in favor of White citizens is the polar opposite of the ‘fair election’ you profess to be concerned for.

 

The objective of these Republican policies are clearly demonstrated by their outcome, denying Black, ethnic minority, poor and disabled citizens their right to vote.

 

This isn’t about any attempt to create ‘fair elections’.

[Jeffr2]

15 minutes ago, MikeyIdea said:

 

I totally agree that the US elections were fair. Absolutely. There were over 60 court cases confirming that the elections were fair. 

Sadly, some posting here seem to have fallen for the lies that the election wasn't free from fraud. It's a major theme pushed by the fake news right wing media outlets. And many members of the GOP. Sad that they fall for it. Very undemocratic.

[impulse]

12 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Come on. Stop with the voter fraud nonsense. There will always be fraud. No matter what you do. Luckily, it's not significant. As proven by the recent elections.

 

Stop reading the fake right wing news.

 

The biggest problem now is voter suppression. Driven by the GOP as they know it's the only way they can win. Very undemocratic.

 

If it's nonsense, explain Windham county, NH.

 

The Dem loser insisted on a recount, and lost even biglier after they recounted.  6% of the votes shifted to Repubs.  They're looking into the discrepancy in the machinery.

 

Maybe it's not fraud, but it sure wasn't a fair election.  I'll let you do the googling...  The article came up Feb 11.

 

If insisting that only legal voters cast only one vote is "voter suppression", I'm all for it.

 

[impulse]

12 hours ago, MikeyIdea said:

I totally agree that the US elections were fair. Absolutely. There were over 60 court cases confirming that the elections were fair. 

 

No, there were 60 court cases where the courts declined to hear the case.  Most of them on the basis of standing and procedure, as opposed to evidence or lack thereof.   Maybe the election was fair.  But why not hear the evidence in court? 

 

Why not deep dive into the machines?   What's to lose, especially in light of recent revelations that state actors have infiltrated so many gub'ment computer systems.

 

The Pentagon, intelligence agencies, nuclear labs and Fortune 500 companies use software that was found to have been compromised by Russian hackers.

You figure election machines were immune?  On what basis do you make that assertion?

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/14/us/politics/russia-hack-nsa-homeland-security-pentagon.html

 

BTW, look up the root source of the expression "most secure elections in history".  Not the thousands of parroting media...  The root source.

 

[candide]

9 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

If it's nonsense, explain Windham county, NH.

 

The Dem loser insisted on a recount, and lost even biglier after they recounted.  6% of the votes shifted to Repubs.  They're looking into the discrepancy in the machinery.

 

Maybe it's not fraud, but it sure wasn't a fair election.  I'll let you do the googling...  The article came up Feb 11.

 

If insisting that only legal voters cast only one vote is "voter suppression", I'm all for it.

 

NH, as Texas, is requiring voter ID. So in order to advocate that voter ID should be mandatory, It's the second time you cite issues which occurred in States requiring voter ID.

Sorry, but It's incoherent.