2020 General Election

[CAA Flagship]

Houndawg’s entire takeaway from Flaggy’s post.

Flaggy got BDK’d by Houndy.
.
.
.
Houndy and BDK sitting in a tree ...

D R I N K I N G

[CAA Flagship]

They are intentionally separated to protect the anonymity of individuals' votes.

You can think that's a bad idea if you want. Georgia's Constitution disagrees. Cry more.

Anonymity? Does Georgia ask what party you want to be affiliated with when you register?

So everything is at the discretion of the "election workers" at the time the envelope is opened?
Who are these people? I'm sure they went through some sort of training but what level of integrity do they have if there is no way to back check them?

When I went to the polls, there were two people at a table. I had to hand over my driver's license. Each of them looked at it and compared the picture with my face. Then, after pulling my name from the log, they printed out a ballot. Each one initialed the ballot and then handed it over to me. I have no idea why there were two of them or what their backgrounds were (1 donk 1 conk?, or just double checking?). I felt that there was a decent level of scrutiny.

[Skjellyfetti]

Anonymity? Does Georgia ask what party you want to be affiliated with when you register?

The ballot is anonymous. Not voter registration...

So everything is at the discretion of the "election workers" at the time the envelope is opened?
Who are these people? I'm sure they went through some sort of training but what level of integrity do they have if there is no way to back check them?

It varies by state.

Since we're focused on Georgia, the ballot is received by the board registrars or clerk and verified by them. It's not an election worker while they're counting votes. It's done as the ballots arrive, not as they're counted.

Upon receipt of each ballot, a registrar or clerk shall write the day and hour of the receipt of the ballot on its envelope. 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 electoŕs application for absentee ballot or a facsimile of said signature or mark taken from said application, and shall, if the information and signature appear to be valid, so certify by signing or initialing his or her name below the voteŕs oath. Each electoŕs name so certified shall be listed by the registrar or clerk on the numbered list of absentee voters prepared for his or her precinct.

https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/20 ... 2-386.html



The Constitution leaves it up to the states how to conduct elections. If you think Georgia conducts their elections poorly, your beef is with the SoS or the prior one (baldy's hero), or the legislature which has been Conk for 15 years.

Btw, there is a big election in Georgia in a month. Bout a million absentee ballots requested so far.

[UNI88]

They are intentionally separated to protect the anonymity of individuals' votes.

You can think that's a bad idea if you want. Georgia's Constitution disagrees. Cry more.

How many tears did you shed on the Russia Collusion Megathread?


I don't think they're going to find enough to change the results of this election but I do think that they've found enough security holes, lapses and inconsistencies that need to be tightened up soon.

[houndawg]

That makes sense, but is there something like a number that matches the ballot with the signed envelope? If the signature is so important (must be since they decided to require it), how can it be traced back to a ballot during an investigation or audit once they are separated? There should be some way to verify, otherwise it is poorly designed.

Exactly. Then the entire integrity of the election falls back to chain of custody, and if THAT is circumspect, then the whole thing is.

[AZGrizFan]

Exactly. Then the entire integrity of the election falls back to chain of custody, and if THAT is circumspect, then the whole thing is.

Thanks.

apparently I meant “suspect”.

[SeattleGriz]

That makes sense, but is there something like a number that matches the ballot with the signed envelope? If the signature is so important (must be since they decided to require it), how can it be traced back to a ballot during an investigation or audit once they are separated? There should be some way to verify, otherwise it is poorly designed.

Exactly. Then the entire integrity of the election falls back to chain of custody, and if THAT is circumspect, then the whole thing is.

Just read where DeKalb county can't provide the chain of custody forms from the voter drop boxes. "They're unsure they exist", even though surrounding counties provided copies with three days.

[SDHornet]

They are intentionally separated to protect the anonymity of individuals' votes.

You can think that's a bad idea if you want. Georgia's Constitution disagrees. Cry more.

How many tears did you shed on the Russia Collusion Megathread?


I don't think they're going to find enough to change the results of this election but I do think that they've found enough security holes, lapses and inconsistencies that need to be tightened up soon.

Well it wont really matter if whatever new election laws that are passed are ignored like the ones currently on the books during this election (signature checks, voting deadlines to name a few).

[BDKJMU]

Trump rally in Valdosta, GA, today, 7 PM ECB..

[kalm]

Trump rally in Valdosta, GA, today, 7 PM ECB..

What are they rallying about?

[AZGrizFan]

Trump rally in Valdosta, GA, today, 7 PM ECB..

What are they rallying about?

One would think it’s about voter fraud and getting the two R senators elected.

[UNI88]

Trump rally in Valdosta, GA, today, 7 PM ECB..

What are they rallying about?

Erectile dysfunction and penis enlargement therapy, subjects near and dear to Trump's heart and undershorts.

[Skjellyfetti]

One would think it’s about voter fraud and getting the two R senators elected.

They're rallying for voter fraud to get two R senators elected?

Spoiler: show

[UNI88]

Now Who’s Contesting Elections?
The Democratic House could overturn results in Iowa and New York.

Iowa’s state elections board on Monday certified Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks’s victory in the 2nd district, flipping a seat currently held by a Democrat. But her opponent, Rita Hart, is dusting off a 1969 federal statute to have the House of Representatives pick the winner. That means Democrats in Washington could overrule Iowa voters to seat a co-partisan and grow their majority.

[AZGrizFan]

One would think it’s about voter fraud and getting the two R senators elected.

They're rallying for voter fraud to get two R senators elected?

Spoiler: show

Yes. Exactly. Playing the Donk game....

[Gil Dobie]

Trump rally in Valdosta, GA, today, 7 PM ECB..

What are they rallying about?

Trump is raising some cash to pay off legal battles.

[SDHornet]

Now Who’s Contesting Elections?
The Democratic House could overturn results in Iowa and New York.

Iowa’s state elections board on Monday certified Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks’s victory in the 2nd district, flipping a seat currently held by a Democrat. But her opponent, Rita Hart, is dusting off a 1969 federal statute to have the House of Representatives pick the winner. That means Democrats in Washington could overrule Iowa voters to seat a co-partisan and grow their majority.

[JohnStOnge]

Lots of false beliefs in this thread but I will just address one in this post. Maybe others in other posts.

There were not any cases where there were more votes than registered voters. None. Really, you people need to start doing something whenever you see one of these claims. Google "Fact check (insert claim)."

Like for instance you get this Google result when you google "Fact check more votes than registered voters:"

https://www.google.com/search?client=op ... 8&oe=UTF-8

Stop it. NONE of these things are true. People put bullshit out on social media or some whack job conservative media source says it and people run with it. STOP IT.

To have civil society we have GOT to get to a situation in which everybody is dealing with reality. We now have a situation in which the "conservative" side is not dealing with reality. Not only with respect to the election thing. But lots of other things. I believe in conservative principles but I also believe in arguing for them based on the truth. This crap has got to stop. Conservatives...or at least something like 80% of them...really need to get a grip and start dealing with reality.

[JohnStOnge]

Same here. There are no doubt thousands of "illegal" ballots in the mix, and I'm not referring to just this ellection. Anyone thinking otherwise has their head in the sand. I don't know how you "uncount" them once they are in unless the "questionable" ballots are kept in a separate "pile". The mass mail in voting only compounded this issue and made the steal that much easier.

And the fact that study after study contradicts your point of view and you have nothing to support it except for maybe a feeling and a few ancedotes doesn't matter. That is exactly what I am talking about when I talk about conservatives not dealing with reality. Many of them just decide they believe something and what the data actually show be damned. You're going to believe there is a bunch of voter fraud regardless of how frequently and conclusively that belief is debunked.

[JohnStOnge]

Ok. There was one study that concluded there is significant voter fraud. Here is somebody from MIT debunking it:

https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/1 ... e-polling/

In any case it's the same old same old. Republicans keep chasing their White Whale. They keep claiming there is significant voter fraud. They've been looking for actual evidence of it for all of my adult life, and I am 63 years old. They have yet to produce it.

[JohnStOnge]

[/quote]

Oh yes we have a Trump poll watcher claiming she saw something. THAT cinches it. I have not been able to find reference to that specific episode. But I have heard in general that there have been a spate of Trump poll watchers who made big claims under circumstances where the problem was that they didn't know what they were looking at and didn't understand what was going on.

I will continue to look for that one being specifically debunked. But I have no doubt that it was debunked. You are looking at a clip of a woman making a claim without being able to hear her being questioned about it, challenged on it, etc. It may have been debunked contemporaneously as the claims of that blonde woman whose testimony has gone viral recently were. We don't know. What we do know is that Giuliani has struck out so far in his efforts to provide evidence of fraudulent activity.

[JohnStOnge]

I still haven't been able to find a specific rebuttal to the woman raising the sequential numbers issue. But I did find this general report on what I believe to be the overall presentation by Rudy and his team to the legislature:

https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2 ... power.html

A quote:

Over the course of roughly five hours Wednesday, Rudy Giuliani, personal attorney for President Donald Trump, and other people he brought forward asserted oft-repeated, oft-debunked claims of voter fraud and election misconduct to the House Oversight Committee.

What you should really be concerned about is having Trump and his people calling State legislators and trying to get them to nix the votes of the people in their States in order to stay in power when he lost the election.

And BTW, if they really were in sequential order, it could be something as simple as election officials arranging mail in ballots according to some number for some reason that facilitated what they were doing. They had plenty of time to do things like that as they were receiving ballots over a long period but could not start counting them until election day. Michigan law says they could not start counting mail in ballots until 7 am of election day. It's very possible that they were organizing things to try to facilitate something associated with the process. The assumption that they would be arranged randomly because they are received randomly is not established.

That kind of thing is why you would have to hear what election officials have to say about it before you get excited. Again: One thing I have heard is that, when Trump's people have gone to court with testimony from poll watchers, they've found that they just didn't understand what they were looking at.

[Pwns]

Watching the Senate debate on GPTV between Kelly Loeffler and Raphael Warnock. God Loeffler is so robotic and has used 2 or 3 phrases like 100 times. I'll probably still have to vote for her, though.

[houndawg]

They are intentionally separated to protect the anonymity of individuals' votes.

You can think that's a bad idea if you want. Georgia's Constitution disagrees. Cry more.

How many tears did you shed on the Russia Collusion Megathread?


I don't think they're going to find enough to change the results of this election but I do think that they've found enough security holes, lapses and inconsistencies that need to be tightened up soon.

This was already widely known in 2016.

[Ibanez]

Watching the Senate debate on GPTV between Kelly Loeffler and Raphael Warnock. God Loeffler is so robotic and has used 2 or 3 phrases like 100 times. I'll probably still have to vote for her, though.

You don't have to vote for anyone.