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

There is Absolutely No Evidence of Widespread Voter Fraud

page: 1
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+6 more 
posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Mod Note: Not sure if this is in right category, I put it in mud-put because of the sensitive nature of topic.

This is an interesting subject being brought up during our current election cycle. The claim being made by the right, is that 'the elections are rigged'. The left counters that claim. During the final debate, Trump was asked if he would accept the election results, and the left claims that 'democracy has never been challenged' in America.




Perhaps because they benefit from the false appearance of free and fair elections. As Sonoma State University professor and Project Censored Director Peter Phillips noted in 2005:

There is little doubt key Democrats know that votes in 2004 and earlier elections were stolen. The fact that few in Congress are complaining about fraud is an indication of the totality to which both parties accept the status quo of a money based elections system. Neither party wants to further undermine public confidence in the American “democratic” process (over 80 millions eligible voters refused to vote in 2004)…. Future elections in the US will continue as an equal opportunity for both parties to maintain a national democratic charade in which money counts more than truth.

A more cynical view: the Democratic “leadership” may simply hope to be able to outspend the Republicans in the election fraud arm’s race.

Washingtonsblog

That quote lends a lot of evidence, as to why the left is so reluctant to call out voter fraud.

I was curious if this would hold true, and found a very lengthy article from Salon. It basically discusses how the presidential election in Florida for the 2000 race between Bush and Gore was 'flawed'. The article discusses the problems as being 'butterfly ballots', or punch cards that weren't fully punched and not counted, and also improper absentee ballots. The article faults the voting process, that it was not clear enough for voters to choose the candidate they wanted, that the ballots cast were not reflective of the votes counted.

Salon: We Really Did Inaugurate the Wrong Guy

Doing a word search of the article, fraud is used once, and it was coming from Republican's during the multiple recounts.

Not all democrats fall under the category of 'there is no such thing as election fraud', or that the frauds committed 'do not change elections'.




ST. LOUIS, MO (KTVI) - A Democrat who is challenging a powerful Democratic family in St. Louis City politics is asking a judge to order a new election. Challenger Bruce Franks is charging State Rep. Penny Hubbard and her campaign coordinated an effort to submit unlawful absentee ballots to win their race for the party nomination for the 78th Missouri House District.

Franks won the vote at the polls but lost the race once the absentee ballots were counted by 90 votes.

Fox2Now

Where did this particular case go? Was anything revealed?

The claim made by the democrat, was that the absentee ballots were not properly sealed and signed. Apparently, the 'fraudulent' winner used her husband to bring in boxes of improper absentee ballots, which the Democrat Election Board graciously accepted; giving just enough votes for the democrat incumbent to win.

The election was thrown out by a judge, and the new, less fraudulent election, gave the win to the challenger.



ST. LOUIS, MO (KTVI)- A St. Louis city judge has ruled in favor of challenger Bruce Franks in his effort to get a new election in the 78th Missouri state house district. Judge Rex Burlison threw out the August 2nd primary results and ordered a new election for Friday, September 16, 2016.

Fox2Now

This is one instance, where the supposed negligible amount of voter fraud, been the decider of an election. The left will make claims, that while voter fraud exists, it is not widespread or has any impact on election results. Where is the empirical evidence to support these claims? There are none, because the system is set up to obfuscate any wrongdoing.

There are only 16 states with voter ID laws. Source

What this means, is that there is no real way to decipher if widespread voter fraud is occurring.

However, there are claims from the past, the left has forgotten:

Democracy and Elections How the GOP Wired Ohio's 2004 Vote Count for Bush to Win

Absentee ballots, and voting machines, but we're not going to call it election fraud. There are some serious holes in our election process, and possibly these flaws are so great, every election is illegitimate. Our democracy should not decide the leadership based on how many votes a particular side can purchase, but under the surface that is what appears to be happening.

I really hate talking about a subject that is polarized, finding credible sources if near impossible. I don't like reinforcing arguments using evidence provided by right-leaning sources when arguing against the left, and vice versa.



There are 18 million invalid voter registrations and an astonishing two million dead people registered to vote in the United States, according to a report by Pew Charitable Trusts. One in eight voter registrations are “significantly inaccurate or no longer valid,” the study claims, proving the epic potential for voter fraud and election rigging.

YourNewsWire

The study referred to comes from Pew Research, so take it as you will. If the claims are true, the potential for abuse is great, and would lend to the idea that in tight election races, the fraudulent vote is the decider.

This is what irks me about the counter-claims, 'no evidence of widespread voter fraud'. It's hard to have evidence, when the policy is lacking in documentation; and that the focus is on a person going in and pretending to be someone else. First, I believe this tactic of voter fraud is one of the less utilized due to its' impracticality; but there are die-hard liberals that will do anything for the win, and in states that only require memorizing someone's name/address to vote is open to debate.



A study of 2,068 alleged election-fraud cases in 50 states between 2000 and 2012 found the level of fraud was infinitesimal compared with the 146 million voters registered over the 12-year period. The analysis found only 10 cases of voter impersonation, the only kind of fraud that could be prevented by voter ID at the polls.

NBC

My concern lies in what the Democrats were fearful of over the Bush elections. That is improper absentee ballots, electronic voting machines, and early voting.

CONTINUED
edit on 23-10-2016 by GodEmperor because: mod note, spacing




posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 06:59 AM
link   


Early voting — by mail or at polling stations — is off to a fast start. More than 5.3 million votes have been cast already, far outpacing the rate for this period in 2012. Balloting is underway in 34 out of 37 early-voting states. In all, more than 46 million people are expected to vote before Election Day — or as much as 40 percent of all votes cast. Both parties are encouraging their supporters to vote early. The outcome of those ballots won't be known until counting begins after polls close on Nov. 8, but some clues are available. Some states report the party affiliations of early voters, as well as breakdowns by race and gender.

ABC

That is quite a chunk of the voting population, and while I don't consider in-person fraudulent votes to be widespread or common, there is potential for abuse. My concern lies in the mail-in absentee ballots, especially in states with lax Voter ID laws. I am also concerned over voting machines, it's difficult to oversee whether those machines are counting the votes properly, or if there is hidden programming altering our elections.

Regardless of what people believe about election fraud, stating 'The Elections are Rigged' is generally true. Consider that we do not have only two choices this year, but media only presents us with two choices. We do not simply have Trump and Clinton, and the portrayal of such creates a false narrative. We also have Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, Evan McMullin, and some Constitutional Party guy. These choices are not given fair media coverage, I believe the election numbers would be dramatically different if these choices were included in media debates and polling.

Take it for what you will, but I do believe fraud is widespread, just not in the sense that it is portrayed by media.
edit on 23-10-2016 by GodEmperor because: content


+8 more 
posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Ridiculous! Quit your whining.



Here's Mr. Keep Your Doctor acknowledging the existence of voter fraud from both parties back in 2008.



I think what we can clearly deduce from all this is:

1) There is overwhelming evidence to prove voter fraud is occurring.
2) Obama is suffering from Alzheimer's and is clearly an assh*le.


Nice work OP S & F
edit on 23-10-2016 by Nucleardoom because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:09 AM
link   
I once dated a kitsune... There is no evidence for that either.

Elections are Rigged !



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: GodEmperor

Nice OP.


I think it is similar to the case of people that say that welfare fraud doesn't exist.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Nucleardoom




Ridiculous! Quit your whining.


I guess I should, seeing how both parties are able to utilize these loopholes.

The St Louis case I mentioned, found 'questionable' voting practices going back at least 12 election cycles. It's just one of those things that is an unspoken acceptance for many.


+9 more 
posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:18 AM
link   
the dnc admitted to rigging the primaries ...that is a direct manipulation of the election process. why bother with primaries if youre going to choose your candidate...to provide the illusion of validity. if hillary didnt win the primary...as i solidly believe. she
isnt a valid candidate for president.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: Nucleardoom
I guess I should, seeing how both parties are able to utilize these loopholes.

The St Louis case I mentioned, found 'questionable' voting practices going back at least 12 election cycles. It's just one of those things that is an unspoken acceptance for many.


That's insane. It just undermines the entire election process. Sad that people's moral compasses have got so bad to just accept it and let it go. Unreal.
Free and fair elections, that aren't fair and we all end up paying for it in the end!
It's all lies.
edit on 23-10-2016 by Nucleardoom because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: CaDreamer
the dnc admitted to rigging the primaries ...that is a direct manipulation of the election process. why bother with primaries if youre going to choose your candidate...to provide the illusion of validity. if hillary didnt win the primary...as i solidly believe. she
isnt a valid candidate for president.


The primary elections are not necessarily covered under the constitution, the political parties have every right to decide which candidate will represent them during general elections. I think there would be more viable options, if all candidates, including third party, received an equal amount of coverage and included in presidential debates.
edit on 23-10-2016 by GodEmperor because: content



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:31 AM
link   
You can not possibly know that until a vote has been cast. You think your strike rate is better than Nostradamus ? GUESS again.

Just sit back and wait for the circus to evolve. Trump will win, but wont make the ceremony in January what ever you call it.

Turmoil is what ensues....

Hot tip: forget religion, forget politics....

Believe in yourself, because truely, that's what makes the difference, believe in your fellow man.

I want the America that use to be, it's not what it was, and it's really pissing me off.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: GodEmperor

originally posted by: CaDreamer
the dnc admitted to rigging the primaries ...that is a direct manipulation of the election process. why bother with primaries if youre going to choose your candidate...to provide the illusion of validity. if hillary didnt win the primary...as i solidly believe. she
isnt a valid candidate for president.


The primary elections are not necessarily covered under the constitution, the political parties have every right to decide which candidate will represent them during general elections. I think there would be more viable options, if all candidates received an equal amount of coverage and included in presidential debates.

had the DNC just choose a candidate and didnt bother with the primaries then yes i would agree with that assessment. the fact that they told over 300 million people that we where choosing the candidate then reniged on that promise. yes offering us the choice in a vote is a promise ...funded by us is an outright lie and manipulation. if you can not see this then you do not understand the meaning of the words corruption and fraud.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: GodEmperor

Despite what you think, voter fraud is rampant among the hispanic community. Many will work under 2-3 names at different jobs. Many go back to Mexico, however they don't turn in their identification, they sell it. The people that buy these identities work, and vote. I would call it subjective if it wasn't rampant at every single restaurant job I ever worked.

The kitchen staff at almost every restaurant in the nation is hispanic, and they work a 2nd job under another name.

It is what it is.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:40 AM
link   
i think the DNC owes the USA all the money it took to cover the primary.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: CaDreamer

I understand that it is not in good taste for a party to lie and manipulate their supporters into believing the party candidates are democratically chosen. The parties have every constitutional right to do this, it's not illegal to lie to people, the responsibility falls on the individual to recognize those falsehoods and not blindly support a party.

It's all about appearances, a little awareness will go a long way.
edit on 23-10-2016 by GodEmperor because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:50 AM
link   
fraud
1
a : deceit, trickery; specifically : intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right
b : an act of deceiving or misrepresenting


you are saying that it is legal for the dnc to commit fraud... wow no it isnt



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 08:00 AM
link   
No one "on the left" denies that voter fraud exists, only that the numbers of actual voter fraud (as opposed to election fraud, mistakes, misunderstandings, etc.) are insignificant especially on the national level.

Aside from the obvious arguments that have been made pointing out that in-person voter fraud is not at all a "rational" way to affect an election, numerous investigations by State governments, the Bush Justice Department, etc. have repeatedly put the lie to the idea that elections (even on the local level in most cases) are "being stolen."

I could provide all the links and quotes again, but why?

My opinion is that as long as an individual State makes it such that any and every citizen can acquire proper ID for voting, I have no issue at all with requiring ID for voting. As long as it is not used, as it is in many cases admitted by various politicians, an effort to keep certain demographics from voting (as in the economically disadvantaged), I have no issue with it.

However, the idea that elections are being stolen from "those on the right" by voter fraud is patently absurd and disproven by the facts of every investigation ever made.

It is, however, the standard excuse to themselves as to why they aren't winning national elections, despite the best efforts of gerrymandering (REDMAP).
edit on 23-10-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

i have hispanic family and i know how they do. I know about the fake IDs they get, the petty crimes they participate in and support.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 08:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: tribal
a reply to: Vector99

i have hispanic family and i know how they do. I know about the fake IDs they get, the petty crimes they participate in and support.


Are you saying that your Hispanic family commits voter fraud?



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: CaDreamer

Regardless of how you feel, fraud is being allowed de facto, and no real push to address, or even measure, election fraud.

There are anecdotal cases, that reinforce assertions of widespread fraud. I think we'd see more instances if laws were enforced.



Citing ''a pattern of fraudulent, intentional and criminal conduct'' in the casting of absentee ballots, a Florida judge voided Miami's mayoral election today and ordered a new vote to be held in 60 days.

NY Times

Election fraud does happen, possibly to the extent that it is widespread, but there is not enough monitoring of elections to determine how widespread. The instances where fraud is found, would have been the deciding factor, and given victory through cheating.
edit on 23-10-2016 by GodEmperor because: quotes



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: GodEmperor

Why would there be a need for voter fraud when the elections themselves are rigged, redundancy at it's finest.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join