Posted on 11/10/2016 6:27:15 AM PST by Kaslin
Al Franken cast the decisive 60th senate vote passing Obamacare and virtually everyone now agrees that his initial election in 2008 was achieved through judicially assisted electoral fraud; Clinton buddy Terry McAuliffe was almost certainly elected by felons and illegals; and my personal prediction is that historians will eventually agree that Obama lost the 2012 presidential election to Romney by about 2.5% of the legal vote.
Democracy depends on the integrity of the secret ballot process and fraud, whether mostly real and extensive or mostly imaginary and minor, cannot be accepted. Electoral reform has to find a place near the top of the new administration's priorities list.
In my pre-retirement life as an info-tech management consultant I generally used and praised products from a company called Sun MicroSystems. Sun revolutionized computing, but came under continual attack from more traditional players like IBM and Microsoft and was eventually forced (mainly, in my opinion, because they hired too many people from failed competitors and then listened to them) to sell its assets into a shelter provided by Oracle Corporation which, much to its credit, has maintained them since.
The reason this matters now is that Sun had, uniquely in its industry, the technology needed to prevent electoral fraud in the United States while dramatically reducing the cost of running elections.
The elections management process looks simple: make a list of voters, prepare the ballots, and check off each voter as they fill out and return exactly one ballot.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Yep, I see the credit card analogy with respect to voting security. You’re right, our voting systems assume people are basically honest. Liberals though, for whatever personal ethics they may have, have a strong totalitarian streak. Which extends to them wanting to control the outcome of elections so that liberals get elected.
Agreed. Changing the Constitution is not the solution to our problems, voting fraud or otherwise.
Our problem is corruption. Period.
Rooting out corruption would resolve our voting problems, our problems with the DOJ, IRS, the Congress and just about everything else from labor unions to the school teachers union.
This election was really about corruption. Certainly everyone has an issue that was of vital interest to them. To some it was the military. To others, abortion. To others, national security....and so on.
But to almost everyone there was the issue of corruption.
Trump must clean house.
For one thing, the new AG should have a task force devoted to making the states purge their voter rolls for ineligible voters.
It doesn't matter. It's really easy to shut these people down.
The Electoral College was designed by the Founding Fathers to prevent the Presidential election from turning into a popularity contest.
In this election, that's what exactly happened: the blue states had a very high margin for Hillary. But, the red states had a lower margin for Trump. And unexpected states turned purple, like Minnesota.
The EC was a compromise between the low-population and high-population states. They were (rightly) concerned that the high-population states could overwhelm the less-populated states, leaving them with no representation in the Presidency.
A Presidential candidate must build a coalition of states with a majority of electoral votes, campaigning and proposing policies that will appear to a set of states with a majority of EVs.
"But, my vote doesn't matter because I live in a deep red state! They don't even campaign here!"
No, your vote matters -- because the candidates must propose (and enact) policies that benefit a coalition of states. Otherwise, those states will turn purple, or the opposite color.
If we had decision by popular vote we'd be talking about President-elect Clinton right now.
Perhaps. But, the leftist media will be trashing Trump constantly.
The low-information leftist voters won't be able (and won't want) to see through the lies, and realize the truth.
It is not enough to have a good system of ID. We need strong, nationwide laws protecting Poll Watchers.
I was a Poll Watcher in Early Voting. The Election Judge would not allow me to stand behind the Clerk checking voter IDs to see if they matched the book. He said that this would be “intimidation”.
So, the dim activists came in and claimed to be someone else. The Clerk KNEW the activist personally and allowed them to impersonate the voter.
This is a favorite method for massive vote fraud now.
Poll Watchers in national elections MUST have the right to observe everything in the Polling Place as well as how ballots and computers are handled after the election.
That’s true. But also keep in mind that a sizable number (10, I think) of the 23 Democratic seats up for election in 2018 are in states that Trump won in 2016. From what I can see, only two GOP seats (Nevada and Arizona) are potentially vulnerable.
Outlaw early voting and mail in voting. All voters must show ID’s. If necessary make voting in person a two day event.
There are good reasons for doing these things and feasible ways of assuring their integrity.
What might be stressed to PEOPLE, however, is a plea that if one CAN cast one’s vote in person on Election Day, one SHOULD. The law requires that employers accommodate this. And when the POPULAR vote is counted, if the in-person results are such that the held-back early vote would be moot, those other votes aren’t added to the popular vote. This can have the effect of making mandates look less firm than they really are.
Historically, the party in the White House loses seats in the mid-term election.
In 1994, it was enough to put both the House and Senate back in control of the Republicans, for the first time in decades. It happened again (for the Democrats) in 2006, and again (for the Republicans) in 2010.
The map may appear to favor Republicans, but it may be the Democrats ready to crawl over broken glass to vote against Trump's agenda.
If Republicans aren't satisfied with Trump's progress, they may stay home.
1. If you read the Constitution, it looks like it was written with the expectation that candidates wouldn't usually get a clear majority in the Electoral College -- and presidents would usually be elected in the special elections in Congress for those cases.
2. It wasn't until the 1920s before all of the U.S. states selected Electoral College electors through popular votes. Before that, electors were selected through different measures -- including state legislatures, popular votes, etc.
So a pair of telescopic eyeglasses? If there was evidence or suspicion of cheating, Donald had a hotline.
The difference this time, perhaps, will be that there will be a live wire in the White House, not a flat tire. He ought to be watching for ways to guard his Congress, and likely will.
People like winning, though, which is why we have our party oligarchy.
When I have time I am going to back and research this, but I suspect this country has seen more dramatic shifts in Congress early in a decade than later in a decade.
It’s really the two-party system that has driven this. I think this country would be much closer to what the founders envisioned if we had three or more viable political parties that could hold at least 20% of the seats in Congress (both houses) and get 50+ electoral votes in a presidential election.
Yes, absentee ballots should be allowed but only if appropriate.
Implement a nationwide voter ID law. End of discussion.
THat’s what my son says.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.