Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, dawgtrails said:

As much as a certain person has screamed about voter fraud - it just isn't a thing. Like for real. It isn't a thing

Just because you say it isn't a thing doesn't mean it isn't a thing. Independent people have gone out to some of the addresses on the verified voter list and found that they didn't exist in both Michigan and Nevada. Yet they had an absentee ballot from the address that registered a vote. This is just a couple hundred. If regular people can do this verification, why cant our government?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 606
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I call  on all the anectdotes from far right leaning folks who know someone's cousin or sister or grandmother that got three mail in ballots and 2 checks and all that jazz.

90% of congress probably doesnt either.

Exactly Dems ran on “people are hurting, people need stimulus checks, kids are hungry...!!!!!!!!” Now they’re adding their pet projects and it’s March and these people that needed and were p

2 hours ago, Insein said:

The goal should be to make sure only Americans are voting and only 1 time. 

Of course. And we pretty much already have that except for a few rare cases.

 

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mile High said:

Voter fraud conspirators are the smartest criminals of all time. It's everywhere but hardly ever proven.

The perfect crime! These dudes should focus on something more profitable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Insein said:

Just because you say it isn't a thing doesn't mean it isn't a thing. Independent people have gone out to some of the addresses on the verified voter list and found that they didn't exist in both Michigan and Nevada. Yet they had an absentee ballot from the address that registered a vote. This is just a couple hundred. If regular people can do this verification, why cant our government?

Why hasn’t someone reported this in court? To a judge?

h/t SID

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Insein said:

Just because you say it isn't a thing doesn't mean it isn't a thing. Independent people have gone out to some of the addresses on the verified voter list and found that they didn't exist in both Michigan and Nevada. Yet they had an absentee ballot from the address that registered a vote. This is just a couple hundred. If regular people can do this verification, why cant our government?

Our government has run many verifications.

There is no evidence of such widespread voter fraud.  Not in MI, not in Nevada.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Insein said:

The goal should be to make sure only Americans are voting and only 1 time. 

I can guarantee that if I am the only person to cast a vote.  Super secure!  Only I vote.  Most important to be most secure.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

You and millions of illegal aliens asking the same thing.

They should do what I do and buy a social security number from Amazon. com.  Capitalism at it's finest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Our government has run many verifications.

There is no evidence of such widespread voter fraud.  Not in MI, not in Nevada.

What constitutes widespread? Hundred is not enough? A thousand then? At what point is it considered "widespread" enough that it's worth looking into?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Insein said:

What constitutes widespread? Hundred is not enough? A thousand then? At what point is it considered "widespread" enough that it's worth looking into?

It was “looked into” about 60 times in court in the lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign. Are you aware of this?

  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, dozer said:

It was “looked into” about 60 times in court in the lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign. Are you aware of this?

Dismissing cases on procedural standing is not "looking into it." If regular citizens can go to addresses on the voted list and see that they are not real, then I would say they were not looked into very thoroughly if at all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Insein said:

Dismissing cases on procedural standing is not "looking into it." If regular citizens can go to addresses on the voted list and see that they are not real, then I would say they were not looked into very thoroughly if at all. 

If you want to prove voter fraud you’re going to have to go to court, and win...

Can you post a link to the story you are referring to?

Why did these regular citizens not take this information to an election official?

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Insein said:

What constitutes widespread? Hundred is not enough? A thousand then? At what point is it considered "widespread" enough that it's worth looking into?

Statistically significant.

I doubt there was even one hundred in those states.  And even that is so insignificant.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dozer said:

If you want to prove voter fraud you’re going to have to go to court, and win...

Can you post a link to the story you are referring to?

Why did these regular citizens not take this information to an election official?

my niece got 3 absentee ballots.  Yes, three.  Maricopa county, AZ .  Her deceased mother got two & she has been dead for 3 years.  The deceased mother also got 2 stimulus checks.  We did mail them back.  Oh yea, these mail in ballots worked real good. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Statistically significant.

I doubt there was even one hundred in those states.  And even that is so insignificant.

 

well, 3 ballots mailed to my niece.  see previous.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, shadrap said:

my niece got 3 absentee ballots.  Yes, three.  Maricopa county, AZ .  Her deceased mother got two & she has been dead for 3 years.  The deceased mother also got 2 stimulus checks.  We did mail them back.  Oh yea, these mail in ballots worked real good. 

Why does it matter if they inadvertently mailed someone an extra ballot or two? As long as they only count one per voter, who cares? I'd much rather them accidentally send a duplicate (knowing that they'll only accept one per voter) than for them to inadvertently NOT send someone a ballot, especially of the person's only access to voting is by mail.

ETA: I agree sending ballots to someone who has been dead that long doesn't look good, but would only be a problem if someone tried to use the ballot to place a vote on the dead person's behalf and the election office actually used it in their tally. I don't know if that has happened but that would obviously be wrong.

Edited by VandyMan
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, VandyMan said:

Why does it matter if they inadvertently mailed someone an extra ballot or two? As long as they only count one per voter, who cares? I'd much rather them accidentally send a duplicate (knowing that they'll only accept one per voter) than for them to inadvertently NOT send someone a ballot, especially of the person's only access to voting is by mail.

ETA: I agree sending ballots to someone who has been dead that long doesn't look good, but would only be a problem if someone tried to use the ballot to place a vote on the dead person's behalf and the election office actually used it in their tally. I don't know if that has happened but that would obviously be wrong.

she can vote in person.  "as long as they only count one per voter".   Yea I agree but she sent in two and laughed about it.  so what, do I turn her in?   She is 27 years old.

I like that though, "so long as they only count one per voter".  so you have faith in the one per voter.  More power to you.  I don't.  The two stimulus checks given to someone dead for two years kind of give me pause as to the overall efficiency of anything government run including the mail in ballots.  Oh & I did Pam's taxes & let them know three years ago she was deceased.  no I'm not an accountant or CPA>

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, shadrap said:

my niece got 3 absentee ballots.  Yes, three.  Maricopa county, AZ .  Her deceased mother got two & she has been dead for 3 years.  The deceased mother also got 2 stimulus checks.  We did mail them back.  Oh yea, these mail in ballots worked real good. 

I believe I also received more than one ballot in Maricopa county. Only one counts. Also, it might be a good idea let the proper authorities know that her mother passed away, clearly federal records are not updated.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, shadrap said:

well, 3 ballots mailed to my niece.  see previous.

Ok sure.  However is that an instance of fraud if they weren’t all used and counted?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tonydead said:

"What's wrong with extra ballots being sent out?"  :mellow:

 

:lmao:

Anecdotal claims that don't amount to fraud (well except the niece who sent in two committed a bit).  And claims always just happen to be by those who pean to the side of thinking there is some major fraud out there.   Sure, lets go with that as proof.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, tonydead said:

"What's wrong with extra ballots being sent out?"  :mellow:

 

:lmao:

OMG handfuls of people got ballots in an election of hundreds of millions as has happened forever :lmao:

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Insein said:

What constitutes widespread? Hundred is not enough? A thousand then? At what point is it considered "widespread" enough that it's worth looking into?

So to stop hundreds...we'll disenfranchise thousands?

I don't think there's anyone in the political game who believes that R's want every American to vote.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Insein said:

Dismissing cases on procedural standing is not "looking into it." If regular citizens can go to addresses on the voted list and see that they are not real, then I would say they were not looked into very thoroughly if at all. 

They are always looking in to improving things. It's sort of a complex issue, it will never be perfect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, shadrap said:

Yea I agree but she sent in two and laughed about it.  so what, do I turn her in?   She is 27 years old.

You say that you're concerned with voter fraud, but when you have direct knowledge of actual, perpetrated fraud you do nothing. 

Something doesn't smell right. 

  • Like 2
  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, shadrap said:

she can vote in person.  "as long as they only count one per voter".   Yea I agree but she sent in two and laughed about it.  so what, do I turn her in?   She is 27 years old.

I like that though, "so long as they only count one per voter".  so you have faith in the one per voter.  More power to you.  I don't.  The two stimulus checks given to someone dead for two years kind of give me pause as to the overall efficiency of anything government run including the mail in ballots.  Oh & I did Pam's taxes & let them know three years ago she was deceased.  no I'm not an accountant or CPA>

What about if a person goes to two different voting stations and votes at both of them?  Is that possible?  One would probably have to be a provisional ballot. 

If this is possible, do you trust voting stations on election day where this fraud can run rampant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol Mitch McConnell. Talking to reporters today he said “there’s going to be an economic boom coming. And when it comes, it will have absolutely nothing to do with this 1.9 trillion.” 

He knows what’s going to happen, and he knows exactly how the public is going to respond to it. And he hopes to stop them. But he won’t. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Z Machine said:

You say that you're concerned with voter fraud, but when you have direct knowledge of actual, perpetrated fraud you do nothing. 

Something doesn't smell right. 

What? People know of lots of crimes that they don't turn people in for.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Insein said:

The goal should be to make sure only Americans are voting and only 1 time. 

What evidence do you have that the “goal” is not already the case?  I’ve yet to see or read anything based in fact that suggests non-Americans are voting or that they are voting more than one time.  

and, even if I grant you that it has happened on a nominal scale, you have all the work still in front of you to show that it made any difference whatsoever in an election where ~150 million ballots were cast.  

“Election fraud” is a straw man narrative the GOP has fabricated to justify taking measures to disenfranchise voters (mostly black and urban) so it can have a fighting chance to win elections.    

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Insein said:

Just because you say it isn't a thing doesn't mean it isn't a thing. Independent people have gone out to some of the addresses on the verified voter list and found that they didn't exist in both Michigan and Nevada. Yet they had an absentee ballot from the address that registered a vote. This is just a couple hundred. If regular people can do this verification, why cant our government?

Here’s a link that contradicts your claim. Please show me a link that supports your claim. I live in Michigan and I don’t believe you.

Here’s another

Here’s how they handle absentee ballots

I can go on. Show me where you’re getting this information you’re so sure of please.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dawgtrails said:

As much as a certain person has screamed about voter fraud - it just isn't a thing. Like for real. It isn't a thing

It has always been a thing, I think it was less of one this year.  Far too much attention brought to it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Snorkelson said:

Here’s a link that contradicts your claim. Please show me a link that supports your claim. I live in Michigan and I don’t believe you.

Here’s another

Here’s how they handle absentee ballots

I can go on. Show me where you’re getting this information you’re so sure of please.

Well you see, there is this youtube video...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank god this thing passed. 

Dead serious. Without this bill democrats would have kep covid clamps on as long as possible. 

Now you can already see the narrative shift that this bill will be what sparks our growth. In reality growth is going to happen because this pandemic is on its last legs. 

Now that we have this bill the shackles will come off much faster. Sentiment will change real fast. 

Its going to be awesome. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The Z Machine said:

You say that you're concerned with voter fraud, but when you have direct knowledge of actual, perpetrated fraud you do nothing. 

Something doesn't smell right. 

so I'm going to turn in my niece for sending in two ballots?  No thanks.  If you don't believe the story that is fine with me also.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sand said:

Relief bill put into law that states aren't allowed to enact tax cuts?  Seems blatantly unconstitutional and I'm sure it will be challenged.

There is a provision in the bill that says if states are going to cut taxes to provide stimulus etc then the states can't use the COVID funds being given them by the fed government to cover the shortfalls they may create by cutting taxes.  Is that what this opinion piece is trying to spin?  Hard to tell since they don't even mention the specific portion of the bill they are talking about (at least the portion that I can read without having a subscription doesn't mention it).  I really hate opinion pieces as evidence of anything :wall: 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, timschochet said:

Lol Mitch McConnell. Talking to reporters today he said “there’s going to be an economic boom coming. And when it comes, it will have absolutely nothing to do with this 1.9 trillion.” 

He knows what’s going to happen, and he knows exactly how the public is going to respond to it. And he hopes to stop them. But he won’t. 

Yeah.

Mitch not pushing the money onto the table for the GA runoffs is going to haunt him for the rest of his political career.  At the least with the R's in charge of the Senate...he could have claimed some of the boom for his Party.  As it stands now, he has to resort to A) hoping the boom fails...for which he can blame Biden or B) try to push the accolades onto former President Trump....which hurts his position in the Party.  

Don't get involved in a land war in Asia....Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line....don't refuse giving money back to your constituents during an election year. 

 

Edited by Thunderlips
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Commish said:

There is a provision in the bill that says if states are going to cut taxes to provide stimulus etc then the states can't use the COVID funds being given them by the fed government to cover the shortfalls they may create by cutting taxes.  Is that what this opinion piece is trying to spin?  Hard to tell since they don't even mention the specific portion of the bill they are talking about (at least the portion that I can read without having a subscription doesn't mention it).  I really hate opinion pieces as evidence of anything :wall: 

Yet again, "we want covid relief to be targeted", but "we don't want to target covid relief so much that it prevents payments to states that wouldn't need help if they didn't cut taxes".

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

Must. respond. to. sho. posts. 

I notice sho “laughed” at your post

But when someone he disagrees with politically posts about another poster he whines to them to post about the topic instead 

interesting

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, shadrap said:

she can vote in person.  "as long as they only count one per voter".   Yea I agree but she sent in two and laughed about it.  so what, do I turn her in?   She is 27 years old.

I like that though, "so long as they only count one per voter".  so you have faith in the one per voter.  More power to you.  I don't.  The two stimulus checks given to someone dead for two years kind of give me pause as to the overall efficiency of anything government run including the mail in ballots.  Oh & I did Pam's taxes & let them know three years ago she was deceased.  no I'm not an accountant or CPA>

The follow up question is did they both get counted?  

I have 0 doubt that multiples get mailed out.   We are talking about government and human error here.    But when we are talking about the small % of time that multiples got mailed, compounded with the small % of the time that when there were multiples mailed out those multiples all got sent back, and then add on the small % of time when they were mailed back somebody didn't catch the mulitples and they counted.       Do you really believe this has noticeable effect on a national election?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

I notice sho “laughed” at your post

But when someone he disagrees with politically posts about another poster he whines to them to post about the topic instead 

interesting

I think sho and tim are in your guy's head more than you claim that Trump is in lib's heads.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...