jerryskids

I'll start with this link: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/mail-voting-what-has-changed-2020

Sure. States like AZ (mine) have had absentee voting for decades; I've done it for like 30 years. It's more of a pull vs. push system, where you explicitly sign up for it, and it is regularly confirmed. Such people are dedicated voters, and unlikely to participate in fraud. @Strikeinformed me today that CO has been doing a system for multiple elections where they send out ballots to all registered voters, but they also have had mechanisms in place to scrub their voter lists. The issue in 2020 was that states which had previously had no such systems in place, mailed out ballots to everyone who was registered. Prior to then, there wasn't much motivation to scrub their voter lists, since the odds of somebody coming in to vote as somebody else were pretty low. But all of a sudden, ballots were going out to anyone registered, many of whom had moved on. What happened to those ballots? Also keep in mind, in states like yours (CA), here is the requirement to register: Again, I'm not saying that there was cheating. I'm saying that there were no mechanisms in place to catch it. Hopefully in the time since then, states have cleaned up their voter rolls.

Of course, nothing to see here. These are the people that want to do away with the 1st Amendment. Protect democracy$#@!

Trump's claims/lawsuits largely revolved around counting ballots. I would hope that in 2020 we had the technology to count ballots, which was never the concern IMO. The primary issue, which I mentioned earlier today, is that by shotgun blasting ballots out in many states which had previously had no such system, there was no mechanism to find fraud. As a systems expert, this is obvious to me, but it long ago became clear that it would be a Spinal Tap "this one goes to 11" discussion whenever I bring it up. Also, PA violated their election laws by accepting undated and late ballots. For SCOTUS, primarily Roberts, IMO that was probably best, because had those votes gotten thrown out, mayhem may have ensued. It's unfortunate that the Chief Justice felt the need to make a decision based on politics vs. law, but it's happened before. That all being said, I've never argued that Trump won. Instead, I've argued that it was not unintelligent to question the end results.

It's interesting that you've generated a scenario where Trump could have stolen the election and we'd never have known, yet the very idea that the DNC might have done similar is so ridiculous as to get someone the dehumanizing label "election denier."

Building off this: "I'd love to get you a nice gift. Can I borrow $5000?"

Also, follow it up with, "I'll be there at 6:30"

My brother is a civil engineer in large construction, and worked on The Sphere. Unfortunately this was being built during Covid and the head of MSG ran out of money (but wanted them to keep working; my bro's company finally gave him the finger and quit). Bummer, since I probably could gotten an inside tour -- his last building was the Falcons football stadium, and I got to go to the first game there (pre-season vs. Cards) and get some inside info on the construction.

"I thought I carved you up and buried you in my basement with the others."

Michigan is beyond help.

I see one anomalous reading in May 2019, then an increase starting around November 2020 when Biden/Harris were elected, then 3.5+ years of consistently high border crossings, then when it became an election issue, they decided to do something about it in the past month or two to buy votes. How'd I do?

Trump That means Sept 2020 was lower.

You guys realize that that is still not down compared to the Trump years, right?

Interesting, thanks. I presume they have a mechanism of maintaining the integrity of their mailing list?

Oh, I know. AZ has had absentee ballots for years. I've done it for decades. Basically I agree with your post.

Fock off, seriously! Good post. Walz actually did better than I thought. I think part of that is that Vance clearly wanted to stay above the fray and present a more "presidential" side. Had he attacked Walz more directly, Walz might have unraveled. Or not.

Close. Most on the right say Vance won. Most on the left are calling it a draw.

Cat 4, huge storm surges, hitting land tonight. Much more including path at https://weather.com/storms/hurricane/news/2024-09-26-hurricane-helene-forecast-landfall-florida-southeast

Pete Rose dead at 83 https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/41538454/pete-rose-all-mlb-hits-leader-dies-83

How so?

You seem upset over Walz's loss. It's OK. Take a deep breath, maybe walk outside.

It wasn't anywhere close to a draw. Vance clearly won, and Walz was a supplicant beta, nodding along with Vance in hope that he didn't have to match with with him. Vance passed the test as VP and heir to Trump should he not last the entire term. He also came off as somebody who will soften Trump's rhetoric in actual implementation. It's hard to imagine that any undecided watched that and decided to vote for Harris/Walz.

You aren't a serious poster. Have a good night, troll

Hey Jeff, thanks for playing! Your boy is getting owned, hope that works for you.

Moderators jump in and squash the discussion about censorship