The 2020 Presidential Election

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
eyephone said:
President Donald Trump, who also voted absentee this year, is among the most visible opponents of expanded mail-in ballots.

Another double standard!
1. Trump can vote absentee this year, but other Americans can not?
Click to expand...

Fact check... True! Trump has voted by mail at least 3 times:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-ever-voted-by-mail/

Trump has used the absentee voting system in at least three elections: Trump voted by mail during New York?s mayoral election in 2017, cast an absentee ballot during the state?s midterm election the following year, and again used a vote-by-mail ballot in Florida?s primary election in 2020.

In 2017, Trump, first lady Melania Trump and their daughter, Ivanka Trump, all cast absentee votes during New York?s mayoral race. These votes made headlines at the time because it was reported that Melania and Ivanka filled out their ballots incorrectly (and therefore were invalid) while the president listed the wrong birth date...
Click to expand...
 
It's OK to vote Absentee by mail.

It's not OK for the State to send out an Absentee Ballot when the voter does not request one.

See the difference?

Ask yourself this: What database is the State using to mail ballots to every registered voter? How clean is their record keeping? Given the nature of government efficiency, it's not unreasonable to have a 10-15 percent error rate in occupancy. In our increasingly mobile society, one may be registered at an old apartment or newly vacated home and not at their new Great Park or Eastwood residence.

For those who say there isn't any evidence of fraud, there is a willful ignorance of the facts. Plenty of fraud is evident, committed by both political parties, so this isn't a R vs D question.

When elections are decided by 4-5 percentage point differences, mail in ballots and ballot harvesting is asking for fraud to be committed. There is a reason why the vast majority of leftists support what Gavin and company want - they can't win at the ballot box unless it's sufficiently stuffed.

My .02c

 
Soylent Green Is People said:
It's OK to vote Absentee by mail.

It's not OK for the State to send out an Absentee Ballot when the voter does not request one.

See the difference?

Ask yourself this: What database is the State using to mail ballots to every registered voter? How clean is their record keeping? Given the nature of government efficiency, it's not unreasonable to have a 10-15 percent error rate in occupancy. In our increasingly mobile society, one may be registered at an old apartment or newly vacated home and not at their new Great Park or Eastwood residence.

For those who say there isn't any evidence of fraud, there is a willful ignorance of the facts. Plenty of fraud is evident, committed by both political parties, so this isn't a R vs D question.

When elections are decided by 4-5 percentage point differences, mail in ballots and ballot harvesting is asking for fraud to be committed. There is a reason why the vast majority of leftists support what Gavin and company want - they can't win at the ballot box unless it's sufficiently stuffed.

My .02c
Click to expand...

But Trump wants to get rid of mail in ballots. He is suppressing the votes. Sorry if you live in a nursing home bring your wheel chair, walker, or have some one push your bed to vote.

When I vote this year in person. I should have a T-shirt that says, if you cough at me I will sue you bro!

Let us be honest, Trump does not like mail in ballot because it does not favor Republicans he said that in a tweet. (Click CNBC article to see his tweet)
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/27/tru...e-ballots-after-attacking-voting-by-mail.html
 
Soylent Green Is People said:
Show your work.
Click to expand...

Everything is a double standard with Trump.

As Trump rails against mail-in voting, his campaign tries to make it easier for Pennsylvania supporters

We have an obligation to our voters to inform them of what the law is in their state and what their options are," the campaign said.


Researchers at UCLA and the University of New Mexico, in conjunction with the Union of Concerned Scientists, concluded that voter fraud is "not widespread" and that mail-in ballot fraud is "very rare."

Stanford University's Democracy & Polarization Lab found that universal vote-by-mail has "no impact on partisan turnout or vote share."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...il-voting-his-campaign-tries-make-it-n1215791

So it is okay for Trumps campaign to give people options to vote. But other people who do not vote for Trump can not vote by mail. A total double standard!


 
Still unwilling to link where and how The Tang Menace wants to stop all mail in ballots. Ok. Let's move on.

I'll show you my work on this:

Biden points out he was warning about pandemic unpreparedness in October while Trump tweeted about iPhones


Source article for Biden's complaint:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2019/10/24/none-these-countries-us-included-is-fully-prepared-pandemic-report-says/

Actual article:

https://www.ghsindex.org/

Was any country 100% ready? Where does the U.S. fall in the list of who is ready and who is not?

Read the article and see....

Dig into the story, not the headline, and you find this was nothing more than Fake News.
 
even the washington compost agrees and so did the fake news nyt

Trump?s concern about mail-in ballots is completely legitimate

President Trump is raising a completely legitimate concern that an unprecedented expansion in the use of mail-in ballots in the 2020 election could lead to voter fraud. But that has not stopped his critics from declaring his statements to be false.

Really? In 2012, before mail-in voting became a partisan political litmus test, the New York Times published an article titled ?Error and Fraud at Issue as Absentee Voting Rises.? The piece noted that ?there is a bipartisan consensus that voting by mail ? is more easily abused than other forms,? and that ?votes cast by mail are less likely to be counted, more likely to be compromised and more likely to be contested than those cast in a voting booth.? A bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, chaired by former president Jimmy Carter and former secretary of state James A. Baker III, concluded in 2005 that ?absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud? and that ?vote buying schemes are far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail.? Carter and Baker also pointed out that citizens who vote at nursing homes ?are more susceptible to pressure, overt and subtle, or to intimidation.? In Florida, there is even a name for this: ?granny farming.?

No one questions that mail-in ballots have much higher rates of not being counted. A Massachusetts Institute of Technology study found that in the 2008 presidential election, 7.6 million of 35.5 million mail-in ballots requested were not counted because they never reached voters or were rejected for irregularities. That is a failure rate of more than 21 percent. In 2008, it did not matter because the election was not particularly close and mail-in ballots only accounted for a fraction of votes cast. But imagine the impact that would have in a close election in which mail-in voting is tried on a massive scale.

If mail-in ballots are adopted widely for the 2020 election, mass failures would be inevitable because about half the states have either no or extremely limited vote-by-mail options, and thus lack the experience or infrastructure for sending out, receiving or securing millions of mail-in ballots. We?d be conducting an experiment of unprecedented scale right in the middle of one of the most contentious elections in U.S. history.

Moreover, there is a huge difference between sending ballots to a small number of citizens who request them and requiring that they be mailed to every registered voter, as Democrats are demanding. Under the Democrats? plan, ballots would inevitably be sent to wrong addresses or inactive voters, putting millions of blank ballots into circulation ? an invitation for fraud. Add to that the danger of what Democrats call ?community ballot collection? (a.k.a. ?ballot harvesting?) where campaign workers collect absentee ballots in bulk and deliver them to election officials, and you have a recipe for disaster.

Eight years ago, the Times declared that ?the flaws of absentee voting raise questions about the most elementary promises of democracy.? Now that Trump is raising those same questions, the publication says doing so is illegitimate. It was right the first time.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/28/trumps-concern-about-mail-in-ballots-is-completely-legitimate/
Click to expand...
 
Typically Trump's tweets are simple yet effective distraction tactics.

I am usually less worrying about Trump's tweets and more worrying about handing him giant military budgets and $4 trillion in unaccountable play money that not one single member of Congress opposed with a recorded vote.

But this time Trump's tactic is directing fueling the fire. How he managed to botch this response is truly mind boggling to me. I think people on both sides can agree - If a man casually snuffs out another man?s life on film he should be tried for murder.

People are fed up with Trump's incompetence. There is so little accountability. Kill a jogger? Walk free for weeks. Crash the economy? Bonuses and bailouts. Botch a pandemic? It?s politics.

These are dark times in the United States of America.
 
Kings said:
even the washington compost agrees and so did the fake news nyt

Trump?s concern about mail-in ballots is completely legitimate

President Trump is raising a completely legitimate concern that an unprecedented expansion in the use of mail-in ballots in

the 2020 election could lead to voter fraud. But that has not stopped his critics from declaring his statements to be false.

Really? In 2012, before mail-in voting became a partisan political litmus test, the New York Times published an article titled ?Error and Fraud at Issue as Absentee Voting Rises.? The piece noted that ?there is a bipartisan consensus that voting by mail ? is more easily abused than other forms,? and that ?votes cast by mail are less likely to be counted, more likely to be compromised and more likely to be contested than those cast in a voting booth.? A bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, chaired by former president Jimmy Carter and former secretary of state James A. Baker III, concluded in 2005 that ?absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud? and that ?vote buying schemes are far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail.? Carter and Baker also pointed out that citizens who vote at nursing homes ?are more susceptible to pressure, overt and subtle, or to intimidation.? In Florida, there is even a name for this: ?granny farming.?

No one questions that mail-in ballots have much higher rates of not being counted. A Massachusetts Institute of Technology study found that in the 2008 presidential election, 7.6 million of 35.5 million mail-in ballots requested were not counted because they never reached voters or were rejected for irregularities. That is a failure rate of more than 21 percent. In 2008, it did not matter because the election was not particularly close and mail-in ballots only accounted for a fraction of votes cast. But imagine the impact that would have in a close election in which mail-in voting is tried on a massive scale.

If mail-in ballots are adopted widely for the 2020 election, mass failures would be inevitable because about half the states have either no or extremely limited vote-by-mail options, and thus lack the experience or infrastructure for sending out, receiving or securing millions of mail-in ballots. We?d be conducting an experiment of unprecedented scale right in the middle of one of the most contentious elections in U.S. history.

Moreover, there is a huge difference between sending ballots to a small number of citizens who request them and requiring that they be mailed to every registered voter, as Democrats are demanding. Under the Democrats? plan, ballots would inevitably be sent to wrong addresses or inactive voters, putting millions of blank ballots into circulation ? an invitation for fraud. Add to that the danger of what Democrats call ?community ballot collection? (a.k.a. ?ballot harvesting?) where campaign workers collect absentee ballots in bulk and deliver them to election officials, and you have a recipe for disaster.

Eight years ago, the Times declared that ?the flaws of absentee voting raise questions about the most elementary promises of democracy.? Now that Trump is raising those same questions, the publication says doing so is illegitimate. It was right the first time.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/28/trumps-concern-about-mail-in-ballots-is-completely-legitimate/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Not what this site says:
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/more-false-mail-in-ballot-claims-from-trump/

Exaggerations on Voter Fraud
As we?ve explained before, experts say mail-in voting fraud is rare. Yet Trump claimed, ?You can?t do the mail-in ballots because you?re going to have tremendous fraud.?

Trump, May 26: People steal them out of mailboxes. People print them and then they sign them, and they give them in. The people don?t even know where they?re double counted. People take them where they force people to vote. They harvest. You know what harvesting is. They take many, many ballots and they put them all together, and then they just dump them, and nobody has any idea whether they?re crooked or not.

When Trump made similar exaggerated claims in April, Richard L. Hasen, a professor of law and political science at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, and author of ?The Voting Wars,? told us: ?Election fraud committed with absentee ballots is more prevalent than in person voting but it is still rare.?

In an op-ed published in the Washington Post, Hasen pointed to News21, a national investigative reporting project that tracks cases of election fraud. It found that about 24% of reported prosecutions between 2000 and 2012 concerned absentee-ballot fraud, making it the most prevalent type of election fraud. ?But the total number of cases was just 491 ? during a period in which literally billions of votes were cast,? Hasen wrote.
Click to expand...

Or this site:
https://www.politifact.com/factchec...-trumps-dubious-claim-thousands-are-conspiri/

? Voting specialists say there?s no evidence of ?thousands and thousands? of people collaborating on fraudulent voting schemes, and Trump didn?t provide any evidence to back up his assertion.

? In general, credible studies have found that voter fraud is rare, whether through in-person voting or voting by mail.

? Rare doesn?t mean nonexistent, however, and there?s evidence that mail ballots pose a slightly higher risk of voter fraud than voting in person.
Click to expand...

So while Trump can be concerned... and some fraud is legitimate, it's not to the extent that he claims it is.
 
Soylent Green Is People said:
It's not OK for the State to send out an Absentee Ballot when the voter does not request one.
Click to expand...

From what I read, his claims about California were just about sending it to anyone... not about voters who do not request one:
https://www.politifact.com/factchec...ifornia-not-sending-mail-ballots-anyone-stat/

President Trump claimed on Twitter Tuesday, without evidence, that California Gov. Gavin Newsom is sending millions of ballots to "anyone living in the state, no matter who they are," while adding "This will be a Rigged Election. No way!"

In the same Twitter thread, Trump repeated his allegation that voting by mail "is substantially fraudulent," a claim election experts have said is overblown.

Here?s Trump?s full statement:

"There is NO WAY (ZERO!) that Mail-In Ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent. Mail boxes will be robbed, ballots will be forged & even illegally printed out & fraudulently signed. The Governor of California is sending Ballots to millions of people, anyone.....

....living in the state, no matter who they are or how they got there, will get one. That will be followed up with professionals telling all of these people, many of whom have never even thought of voting before, how, and for whom, to vote. This will be a Rigged Election. No way!"

Trump repeated his claim during a news conference Tuesday afternoon, saying "anybody that walks in California is going to get a ballot."

Trump?s attacks come two days after the California Republican Party, along with national GOP groups, filed a federal lawsuit against Newsom, a Democrat, to halt his plan to send mail-in ballots to Californians ahead of the November election.

Newsom earlier this month ordered all counties to send out mail-in ballots, citing health concerns amid COVID-19. Contrary to Trump?s claim, no ballots have yet been sent out.

We zeroed in on Trump?s claim that "anyone living in the state, no matter who they are" would receive these ballots. We set out on a fact check.

Our research

A review of Newsom?s executive order shows only registered voters would receive vote-by-mail ballots, not "anyone living in the state," as Trump claimed. 

"Each county elections officials shall transmit vote-by-mail ballots for the November 3, 2020 General Election to all voters who are, as of the last day on which vote-by-mail ballots may be transmitted to voters in connection with that election, registered to vote in that election. As set forth in this paragraph, every Californian who is eligible to vote in the November 3, 2020 General Election shall receive a vote-by-mail ballot."

The Secretary of State?s website outlines criteria for registering to vote in California.

You must be:

- A United States citizen and a resident of California,

- 18 years old or older on Election Day,

- Not currently in state or federal prison or on parole for the conviction of a felony

- Not currently found mentally incompetent to vote by a court

This criteria reinforces the fact that not just "anyone" would receive a ballot.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for evidence supporting Trump?s statement.
Click to expand...

Maybe he said that about some other state?
 
IHO - Courtesy of the State of California, you will get an absentee ballot no matter if you wanted one or not. I will get an absentee ballot, no matter if I want one or not.

Those pushing ballots by mail are also pushing ballot harvesting - a simple pathway to cheat during an election as we saw in 2018.

Being sent a ballot without requesting one - sent from a database that has never been thoroughly screened - is a recipe for fraud. It really is that simple.


Kenoko - First, the Cheeto Hitler has already asked for George Floyd murder to be investigated. Second, the POTUS cannot get involved in every crime out there as it taints the jury pool. Third - this is a State matter first, not Federal. There is an established chain of events that must occur before prosecution can start.

Going back to the Pandemic question - perhaps reading the readiness report posted may change your thinking. If we were ready in a 2019 report, weird how in a 5 month period all that readiness went out the window. (Spoiler Alert: It did not)

Although I'm 100% clear that there is a very big difference between murder under color of authority, and what Jaden Hayden did, I'm really not finding much out of those on the Left about Mr. Hayden's actions. Why might this be? Is everything now ONLY to be blamed on The Short Fingered Vulgarian? I guess so. I hear it might be cloudy this weekend, spoiling my planned beach trip. Stupid Trump and his damnable Russian made weather controlling machines!

my .02c
 
irvinehomeowner said:
So while Trump can be concerned... and some fraud is legitimate, it's not to the extent that he claims it is.
Click to expand...

"some fraud is legitimate"

how much fraud is enough?  when elections are decided by hundreds of votes, giving 100+ million voters each a mail in ballot would be a disaster.  when a small amount of voters vote absentee, then 0.1% of mail in ballots being fraudulent is no big deal...but when 0.1% of 100 million is fraudulent that's 100,000 fraudulent ballots
 
Soylent Green Is People said:
IHO - Courtesy of the State of California, you will get an absentee ballot no matter if you wanted one or not. I will get an absentee ballot, no matter if I want one or not.

Those pushing ballots by mail are also pushing ballot harvesting - a simple pathway to cheat during an election as we saw in 2018.

Being sent a ballot without requesting one - sent from a database that has never been thoroughly screened - is a recipe for fraud. It really is that simple.
Click to expand...

I understand that but:

1. That's not what Trump said, he didn't say Cali is sending ballots to voters who did not request one... he said they were sending ballots to *anyone*.
2. Sure, as the links I posted said, in-person voting is less fraudulent than mail in ballots... but not to the extent of what Trump is claiming.

And that database you are talking about, it's the same database they send the ballot information to for in-person voting... so that has to be sent out regardless... and from what I understand, it's based on if you've registered to vote... so again, not *anyone*. To fraud this system, you also have to fraud the registration, which is why the fact checking research has said it is rare.
 
Kings said:
irvinehomeowner said:
So while Trump can be concerned... and some fraud is legitimate, it's not to the extent that he claims it is.
Click to expand...

"some fraud is legitimate"

how much fraud is enough?  when elections are decided by hundreds of votes, giving 100+ million voters each a mail in ballot would be a disaster.  when a small amount of voters vote absentee, then 0.1% of mail in ballots being fraudulent is no big deal...but when 0.1% of 100 million is fraudulent that's 100,000 fraudulent ballots
Click to expand...

That is the question.

But doesn't the Electoral College smooth this out for more dense states?

To whit... if we are really counting individual votes as who should be President... doesn't that mean that Trump should have lost in 2016? Maybe that's what he's mad about.
 
Soylent Green Is People said:
Kenoko - First, the Cheeto Hitler has already asked for George Floyd murder to be investigated. Second, the POTUS cannot get involved in every crime out there as it taints the jury pool. Third - this is a State matter first, not Federal. There is an established chain of events that must occur before prosecution can start.
Click to expand...

I agree. Why didn't President Trump say exactly what you just said? I would have no problems with that. Instead he went with all caps idiotic tweets. How does calling protesters "THUGS" accomplish anything positive?

A competent POTUS would know that now is the time to deescalate tension.

 
True life example:

Soylent Yellow gets ballot information for OC, but is living in LA. Because Soylent Yellow used to live in New York, voting data still flows to our home in OC.

If Soylent Yellow was to register in LA, by November, the Registrar would be sending one to LA and one to OC because their database will not be updated in time. If NY were to adopt similar measures to what California has, Soylent Yellow would also get a NY ballot mailed to her. 3 Mailed ballots - and depending on who "harvests them" it's pretty clear fraud might occur.

There are 39m people in California. Assume 1/3 of those are registered to vote - about 12m give or take as that's fairly close to how many voted in 2016 in California.

Out of those 12m, how many might have the same number of ballots sent as we might receive? Anyone reading this recently move, buy another home, have a 2nd mailing address? If one cannot see the problem of sending out ballots without first being requested by the voter, I'm not sure what can then be done.
 
Kenoko - quite a mixed message. POTUS did initially speak (not tweet) about the George Floyd murder. POTUS did tweet (not speak) about thug protestors.

You don't de-escalate violent protestors. You step on them. That's what I want out of a Federal response no matter the party in power. Even a former head of the NAACP, a resident of the city wanted the "protestors" out (using words much, much stronger than thugs btw).

If one prefers a calm, soothing, leader, then the mayor of that town might be the right person - someone who has encouraged social distancing and to wear masks while protesting instead of taking protective action on behalf of their citizenry. No thank you from me however as I prefer my cities to not burn.

Are there important issues in the Floyd murder to address? Yes. Do we see violent protests as hundreds are shot up in Chicago or Baltimore? No. Selective moral outrage that also grants a waiver for behavior that ends up in a looting spree is not something to be encouraged or glorified as we see today.
 
Yeah and they can go to jail for fraud.
But let us go back to the main point.
Trump is against mail in ballots. But Trump has voted by mail and the White House press secretary has voted by mail for more than a decade. (10 years)
In addition, the Trump campaign is giving options to voters that vote for Trump different options to vote.

To sum it up, if you vote for Trump. Vote by mail is okay. If you do not vote for Trump you can not vote by mail. Sorry it is a joke. Lol
 
Soylent Green Is People said:
Kenoko - quite a mixed message. POTUS did initially speak (not tweet) about the George Floyd murder. POTUS did tweet (not speak) about thug protestors.

You don't de-escalate violent protestors. You step on them. That's what I want out of a Federal response no matter the party in power. Even a former head of the NAACP, a resident of the city wanted the "protestors" out (using words much, much stronger than thugs btw).

If one prefers a calm, soothing, leader, then the mayor of that town might be the right person - someone who has encouraged social distancing and to wear masks while protesting instead of taking action. No thanks from me however.
Click to expand...


Hard disagree. Going with the authoritarian rhetoric is taking the wrong route . Do we really want Minneapolis 2020 - when The Purge became a documentary?

It's a display of strength, not weakness, for a POTUS to show empathy. 40 million + are jobless, lines to food banks are miles long, people are angry and fed up. It's no secret that people who suffer most in a pandemic are people with lower level of resources which in America overlaps with people of color.

This is quickly becoming the narrative of the violent protests - America: where a black man can't take a knee on a football field for thirty seconds, but a white cop can take a knee on his neck for eight minutes.

A competent POTUS would understand people are hurting and try to show empathy and deescalate violent tension. Instead he is fueling the fire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top