It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Strange twist on voter fraud

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Texas voter fraud concerns prompt hotline offering $5,000 reward for tips

Link to source


“Vote harvesting, a form of voting which is largely unwatched, … [has been] growing in the last few cycles,” said Aaron Harris, a Republican political consultant from North Richland Hills who filed at least one complaint with the state citing election concerns in Tarrant County. “We are getting defeat handed to us in mail-in ballots and we aren’t even paying attention to that.”


So far, this looks like someone is just offering some insurance that voter fraud will be watched. But then you see this:


This is “a systematic and deliberate attempt to suppress votes in the Latino community, specifically attacking the elderly,” said state Rep. Ramon Romero, D-Fort Worth.


Now this is strangely reminiscent of the voter ID backlash. A coherent argument does not exist, so a manufactured one will do.

How in the world is offering a reward for information that leads to a conviction of fraud hampering any legal votes? Unless the democrats are nice enough to vote for the elderly Latino community that just can't get out that day.




posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Why is it that only the republicans complain about voter fraud? Perhaps instead of complaining they should also be out there harvesting ballots.

Sometimes you have to use the same dirty tricks as your opponent to ensure a fair fight.

edit on 20-10-2016 by BlueShaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   
You answered your own question. Democrats want anything that can vote illegally voting. This is what they do to tip the scale. In many districts it does not take much effort. I know where I am, 100 votes is all it took to elect a Democratic mayor. He is already wasting tax dollars on hair brain schemes like a train between two cities with little commerce. All on the backs of mid to above mid taxpayers. Every model shows it is a waste of money but all he has to do is apply for Federal funds and it will be approved which spreads the hurt out among all the states evenly.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueShaman
Why is it that only the republicans complain about voter fraud? Perhaps instead of complaining they should also be out there

-harvesting ballots.


Is that code for fraudulent voting?



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueShaman
Why is it that only the republicans complain about voter fraud? Perhaps instead of complaining they should also be out there harvesting ballots.

Sometimes you have to use the same dirty tricks as your opponent to ensure a fair fight.


I am not sure about that. I know that in order to claim to have integrity, cheating would kind of wipe that away, but then to be in politics, I doubt integrity actually exists outside of those super nice poster pictures that show up in offices.

Trying to remove ways to cheat seem like such an easy idea to suppress voter fraud, but the democrats sure don't like any ideas that go in that direction. But then, I keep being assured by democrats that voter fraud is nothing but a vast right wing conspiracy, so the opposition to limiting cheating really has me stumped.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Every election, there are at least a few precincts where the number of votes cast exceeds the number of registered voters, and invariably those are inner-city (ie, heavily Democratic) districts.

Even if we accept that the critics are confusing the number of votes cast with the number of ballots cast, you'd still need a voter turnout of nearly 100% for this situation to be legitimate. (If every single registered voter in a district voted, but a few of them messed up their ballot and had to fill out a new one, then you would legitimately have more ballots cast than there were registered voters.)

A bit of quick Googling reveals that the turnout in a presidential election year is normally in the range of 50-60% of eligible voters, so a turnout well over 90% would be a major outlier. Whether Dems want to hear it or not, there is circumstantial evidence that widespread voting fraud may be a real thing, and that it mostly benefits the Democrats.
edit on 20-10-2016 by AndyFromMichigan because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

be careful, the SJW's will be along shortly to challenge you to prove that "voter fraud happens on a WIDESPREAD scale and influences elections". (and amazingly enough, no proof will be good enough) so you have been warned.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

be careful, the SJW's will be along shortly to challenge you to prove that "voter fraud happens on a WIDESPREAD scale and influences elections". (and amazingly enough, no proof will be good enough) so you have been warned.

Kinda reminds me of termites. Tiny little critters. One or two, here or there, might do a little damage, but no big deal, you won't even notice.

Just give them a little time, let them grow in their boldness, then stand back and watch the the results. Just don't lean on anything.



new topics

top topics



 
9

log in

join