Voting

Trump's Warnings About Voting by Mail Mix Reasonable Concerns With Fanciful Conspiracy Theories

New York City's primary election fiasco reveals gross incompetence rather than fraud.

|

Donald Trump's main beef against wide use of mail-in ballots is that it creates "a great Voter Fraud scenario," allowing Democrats to "cheat in elections" and deprive Republicans such as himself of their just victories. While the evidence of such a scheme is hard to find, the president recently has voiced a more realistic concern: that a flood of mail-in ballots from Americans worried about visiting polling places in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic will overwhelm vote counters, delay the announcement of results, and create lingering uncertainty about who won.

The experience with the recent primary elections in New York City, which was woefully unprepared to tabulate mail-in ballots, shows this danger is more than a figment of the president's imagination. Six weeks after those elections, the votes are still being counted.

New York Times story about the fiasco, which it says has fed fears of a "November Nightmare," identifies several problems. Notwithstanding the likelihood that COVID-19 anxiety would result in an unusually large number of mail-in ballots—about 400,000, it turned out—the city's Board of Elections did not have enough workers. Some 34,000 ballots were sent to New Yorkers the day before the June 23 primary, giving them insufficient time to vote. Thousands of ballots were discarded because of "minor errors." Thousands more were not counted because the U.S. Postal Service did a haphazard job of postmarking the prepaid envelopes, which was required to document that ballots were cast before the deadline.

The upshot of this incompetence is that the Democratic candidate in New York's 12th Congressional District, which includes parts of three boroughs (Manhattan, Queens, and Brooklyn) and is currently represented by Carolyn Maloney, still has not been determined. Her leading challenger, Suraj Patel, currently trails her by a few thousand votes, meaning uncounted ballots could determine the outcome.

Votes also are still being counted in the 15th Congressional District, which includes part of the Bronx and is currently represented by José Serrano, who is not seeking re-election. The uncounted ballots are less likely to be decisive there, since New York City Councilman Ritchie Torres has "a comfortable lead" in the race for the Democratic nomination.

Yesterday a federal judge in Manhattan, responding to a lawsuit by Patel and other plaintiffs, ruled that the Board of Elections must count about 1,200 ballots received the day after the primary "without regard to whether such ballots are postmarked by June 23." U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres also said ballots postmarked by June 25, two days after the election, must be counted. The fate of votes disregarded because of "various small errors," such as ballot envelopes sealed with tape or lacking signatures, remains up in the air.

"This election is a canary in the coal mine," Patel told the Times. One obvious response is increased staffing. "This is logistics," said Democratic political consultant Bruce Gyory. "It isn't rocket science."

During a press conference yesterday, Trump mixed the legitimate concerns raised by New York City's bungling with his fanciful notion that voting by mail, which most states allowed without any special justification even before the pandemic, is a Democratic conspiracy to defeat him and other Republicans. "This was about six weeks ago, and they have no clue what's going on," he said. "They've lost ballots. There's fraudulent ballots….Nobody knows what's happening with the ballots and the lost ballots and the fraudulent ballots, I guess. I think you'd probably have to take the Carolyn Maloney race and run it over again. How can you do this? And this is a small race with literally thousands of people—small thousands—and it's all messed up."

Note that Trump simply assumes the existence of "fraudulent" ballots, which are one of his preemptive excuses for a defeat that looks increasingly likely. "There is no evidence that the New York primary results were tainted by criminal malfeasance, according to a wide array of election officials and campaign representatives," the Times says.

It is true that voting by mail is more vulnerable to fraud than voting in polling places, since the ballots can be stolen. "You can take thousands of ballots, put them together and just dump them down on somebody's desk after a certain period of time," Trump asserted yesterday.

Contrary to Trump's often repeated claims about "totally rigged" voting by mail, however, there is no evidence that the problem is widespread or that it has affected recent election outcomes. "Election fraud in the United States is very rare, but the most common type of such fraud in the United States involves absentee ballots," Rick Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Irvine, law school, told the Times in April. "Sensible rules for handling of absentee ballots make sense, not only to minimize the risk of ballot tampering but to ensure that voters cast valid ballots."

When he talks about the potential for fraud, Trump draws an arbitrary distinction between "absentee ballots," which he says are "great," and "universal mail-in ballots," which he says "have turned out to be a disaster." That would be news to the 33 states that have long offered no-excuse absentee ballots, including five where elections are conducted almost entirely by mail.

If the threat of systematic fraud is largely imaginary, so is Trump's belief that he has the power to do something about it. Yesterday a reporter asked him whether "an executive order on this" would be "appropriate." Trump's reply: "Well, I have the right to do it. We haven't gotten there yet, but we'll see what happens." Contrary to Trump's confidence in his own omnipotence, he does not have the authority to dictate voting procedures throughout the country, or to punish states that allow residents to use mail-in ballots by withholding congressionally appropriated funds, which he also has threatened to do.

Judging from historical evidence, Trump's assumption that voting by mail disadvantages Republicans is mistaken, and it is apt to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. The Washington Post notes that "President Trump's unfounded attacks on mail balloting are discouraging his own supporters from embracing the practice, according to polls and Republican leaders across the country, prompting growing alarm that one of the central strategies of his campaign is threatening GOP prospects in November." Republican officials report that voters are confused by Trump's distinction between good and bad absentee ballots, the Post says, and surveys show "a growing divide between Democrats and Republicans about the security of voting by mail, with Republicans saying they are far less likely to trust it in November."

It looks like Trump is belatedly recognizing the electoral threat posed by his own fulminations. "Florida's Voting system has been cleaned up," he tweeted today, "so in Florida I encourage all to request a Ballot & Vote by Mail!" If Trump's hyperbolic warnings about voting by mail suppress Republican turnout this fall, he will be the unwitting orchestrator of a scheme that did not exist until he started talking about it.

Update: On Tuesday night, the Board of Elections declared Maloney and Torres the winners in their races.

NEXT: The COVID-19 Pandemic Is Crushing State Budgets. A Federal Bailout Is Still a Bad Idea.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. In totally unrelated news, the USPS union has endorsed Joe Biden.

    1. Could that be because the Trump-supporting postmaster general (who donated $2 million to Trump and holds $30-$75 million in assets with USPS competitors), who was appointed in June of this year, has stopped all overtime for USPS workers (a very unusual move), to cause mail delays so Trump could complain about the unreliability of mail delivery?

      1. When was the last comment you had that didn’t mention Trump?

        1. Chip bitterly masturbates to an 8×10” glossy of Trump.

          1. Hahaha, what a perfect example of projection.

            1. I quit working at shoprite to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $45 to 85 per/h. Without a doubt, this is the easiest and most financially rewarding job I’ve ever had. I actually started 6 months ago and this has totally changed my life.

              For more details……► Cash Mony System

          2. “Chip bitterly *anally* masturbates”
            Fixed that for you. If you read his comments, Trump obviously equals big daddy issues for Chipper. It’s a catamite’s resentments all the way down.

            1. Needs more ketamine!

      2. I’m certain it has nothing to do with the Post Office hemorrhaging money like they are a dot com company. Year over year multi-billion dollar losses with no end in sight? No, there is no other explanation other than Trump being evil.

        1. Republicunts forced the post office to pre-fund 75 years of retirement obligations in a naked attempt to bankrupt the program. They still haven’t recovered.

          1. Yeah, it’s too bad that the Democrats have never been in a position to be able to correct that… oh… wait….

            1. Republicans control the senate and the White House, even if they are feckless incompetents with no agency who should never be expected to do their job.

              1. That’s right, I remember how Dems were never in power from 2006 and beyond, you know, the year it was passed.

                1. There have been multiple bipartisan attempts to repeal the mandate. You can analyze the party breakdown of the votes to see why they failed. Democrats passed it in the House in February.

                  Of course we don’t hold Republicans accountable for failing to act or having the terrible idea in the first place, do we?

                  1. Of course I hold the Repubs responsible. But I: A) am actually aware of what the law says as opposed to claiming the false things like 75 years, and B) am not a tribalist so I don’t pretend that Dems who had two years of complete control and did nothing are somehow the knights in shining armor on this matter.

                    Once you start realizing Dems and Repubs are both responsible entities in life, things start making much more sense.

                    1. Don’t bother. Tony’s a fifty-center.
                      He’ll never be convinced no matter how coherent and logical your argument is.

                    2. They did nothing… other than save the world from economic collapse? Those two years?

                      Get new material. You’re not even trying to understand the reality of the situation. If you add up all the demands Republicans have placed on those two years in this disingenuous game, there would be literally not enough working hours for Democrats to have done to.

                      And it’s still the argument that Democrats suck because they didn’t do all the hard work Republicans have no intention of doing despite their considerable time in majorities.

                    3. Hahahahaha Tony actually thinks they saved the world from economic collapse.

                      Hahahahahahahahaha

                    4. Your defense is that Democrats didn’t have enough time to fix all the problems that Republicans created?! Good lord, there is grasping at straws and then there is that. That kool-aid must be really tasty for you.

                  2. And if it wasn’t funded you would be worried about the postal workers pensions.

            2. Democrats don’t believe in pre-funding 75 days of retirement obligations.

              1. So maybe somewhere between 75 days and 75 years there’s a compromise to be had. This is all a totally good-faith effort after all.

                1. Ok, 74 years. Nothing is too good for our postal workers.

          2. “Republicunts forced the post office to pre-fund 75 years of retirement obligations in a naked attempt to bankrupt the program”

            This is bullshit full stop.

            Everyone with a brain understands that the Post Office’s days are numbered. They are essentially a company that is winding down, as they should. While there are some needs for mail, the demand continues to decline.

            Back in the early 2000s the Post Office struck a deal with the government. Congress would yield its Stamp-price control to the Post Office. But in return, the Post Office needed to fund its pensions with those Stamp price increases under the assumption that the Post Office isn’t going to be around to collect any substantial money in 50 years.

            There is nothing bad about this. The post office is a buggy whip manufacturer, and recognizing that now is smart. And for *ONCE* the government realized this and struck a deal to make sure the Tax Payer wasn’t stuck with the pensions.

      3. As if mail delivery was reliable at any point in the last few decades. Pull the other one

      4. You know they were filing ridiculous overtime logs to milk as much as they could from the taxpayers right? That the USPS has billions of unfunded pensions to pay out?

      5. When was the last time you didn’t mention trump

      6. Obama advocated eliminating 12,000 positions from the USPS on top of the 250,000 that had been eliminated over 20 years and wanted to stop mail delivery on Saturdays.
        Do you really imagine someone taking over 2 months ago has made any real changes in USPS? Do you think the money Democrats want to bail out the post office with would have any effect by November?
        How does someone “hold assets” of USPS competitors? Does that mean they have bought stocks? No one else in our government owns stock in any companies?
        The left depends on the uninformed and easily influenced lefty sheep to believe all their lies and propaganda and to keep their minds closed. If the Democrats knew of all of these problems with the USPS why have they pushed vote by mail?
        My wife and I applied for and recieved provisional ballots. We sent them both back on the same day. One arrived. That is 50%. Do you find that a little concerning?

  2. Trump’s Warnings About Voting by Mail Mix Reasonable Concerns With Fanciful Conspiracy Theories

    Thank you, and honest headline.

    1. Of course, they couldn’t just be justified concerns

      1. I love the logic baked in there that if you make voter fraud detection impossible and don’t bother to look then somehow it’s impossible for voter fraud to exist. Kinda like defunding 911 services then taking credit for reducing the amount of crimes reported.

      2. Meh. Doing the “both sides” ploy does actually draw people in. Once we agree that voter fraud is a real concern, we can do something about it. Using Trump as a punching bag is a cheap but effective way of doing that. The problem with this is partisanship. I still hear people talk about the “myth” of voter fraud despite the multiple scandals in the Spring primaries

  3. I stand by my prediction: In three months we’ll start seeing editorials from the establishment media suggesting we delay the election.

    1. Depends on how far back Joe Biden is. If it near or out of the margin of fraud, you’ll be correct.

      1. They’re starting with the “Joe Biden should not debate” schtick. And for the dumbest fucking reasons, too.

        1. It’s not for dumb reasons. Not wanting your presidential candidate to be exposed as an unhinged dementia patient before he becomes the most powerful person in the world is nothing if not rational.

          1. Yeah, but he won’t be president that long.
            A couple weeks to be sure the cabinet has the right make up, and drop the amendment 25 documents.
            Remember folks, if you vote for the democratic party electors, you are voting for the VP; who did not run any kind of campaign, but was anointed by the party elite based on sexist and (probably) racist criteria.

            1. Nah, they’ll ride Joe out until after the midterms, then dump him. That way his VP can run for 2 full on her own, and as an incumbent both times.

              1. He may not be physically able to go that long. Though they’ll damned well try. He’ll stick around at least through Inauguration, God forbid that should happen.

            2. And the new President will be someone who was happy that small businesses were burned down in the LA riot in 1992, because of the demon rum.

          2. It’s not for dumb reasons.

            THEIR reasoning is dumb. The logic is that Trump is such a prolific liar that any meaningful debate is impossible. They suggest that Trump is so uniquely awful and counter-factual, that honest people are incapable of dealing with his lies in real time. Literally. Seriously, that’s the argument.

            1. So in other words Biden is incapable of countering blatant lies because why? Oh that’s right. That dementia thing.

              1. When Donald Trump is the one to skip the debates based on some laughable pretext (something he has already done before!), I’m sure you’ll be right on the case.

            2. But it’s not the Biden campaign’s argument. This comes from some op-ed somewhere that argued in favor of Biden skipping the debates. I’m sure we agree that the candidates are not responsible for every thought experiment or bit of advice that shows up on op-ed pages.

              1. Lots of pro-Biden bloggers and pundits are coming to the same conclusion. That Biden has nothing to gain and a lot to lose by debating Trump.

                1. I would counsel to pay attention to which candidate eventually chickens out. Trump has done this before, remember?

              2. Where did I even suggest the candidate was responsible? I made a prediction about the media, then pointed to an argument in the media. I never once intoned that Biden was concocting this ‘skip the debates’ plan himself. But… give it time.

                1. Fair enough, I don’t agree with the op-eds either.

                  What, will the debates be the first time in history Trump improved his poll numbers by speaking in public?

                  1. Literally, yes. The debates are the only chance Trump has.

                    1. Literally, yes. The debates are the only chance Trump has needs.

                    2. Ah, I understand now. Despite the fact that Trump is the only one of the two to demonstrate a proclivity for skipping debates, this time it’s bad for Biden to do so because Trump fanboys actually think he’s finally gonna whip out his throbbing epic troll skillz and vanquish the tards.

                      Nazi hero narratives are so stupid.

          3. Yeah, but that’s not the publicly stated reason. The publicly stated reason is that they don’t want Trump getting a platform at the debates.

            1. What is Twitter, chopped twit?

              1. Yes.

          4. They at least need to get him through the DNC convention before the big reveal or else they’ll have a shitshow like nobodies business to deal with and a fracture they won’t be able to deal with prior to the election.

        2. I guarantee you that every DNC strategist is waking up in a cold sweat at night thinking about Joe Biden agreeing to even one debate.

        3. Joe Biden has agreed to three debates. Donald Trump has agreed to zero. Stop believing falsehoods just because Republican propagandists spread them. You have to actually be skeptical of the self-serving things government officials say if you want to be a government skeptic.

          1. Joe Biden has agreed to three debates.

            Well since this was never reported at Breitbart or Daily Wire, how can you expect the peanuts around here to know that?

            1. This thread was about the media writing editorials that they shouldn’t debate, not that Biden didn’t want to.

              Get off your high horse.

          2. There are left wing talking heads openly advocating that Biden refuse to debate trump.

            Joe Biden could still lose this election Opinion by Joe Lockhart

            Joe Lockhart is a CNN political analyst. He was the White House press secretary from 1998-2000 in President Bill Clinton’s administration. He co-hosts the podcast “Words Matter.” The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion at CNN.

            Whatever you do, don’t debate Trump. Trump has now made more than 20,000 misleading or false statements according to the Washington Post. It’s a fool’s errand to enter the ring with someone who can’t follow the rules or the truth. Biden will undoubtedly take heat from Republicans and the media for skipping the debates. But it’s worth the risk as trying to debate someone incapable of telling the truth is an impossible contest to win.

            1. I know that, and Biden agreed to three debates anyway.

              1. That Biden agreed to three debates doesn’t make it not news worthy that some on the left are pushing for him to not debate Trump.

                1. As long as you characterize the facts as they are and not as you want them to be.

          3. Tony is the one, who needs to stop believing falsehoods.
            Trump has not only agreed to three debates but wants more of them.

  4. Conspiracy theory? You think they won’t try to get rid of ballots in swing states that voted for trump? They tried everything else what in the world makes you think they will suddenly become ethical?

    Once the ballot leaves your hand it’s under their control. A ballot placed at a voting center box logically had less chance of tampering than one placed in the mail.

    Why is reason becoming so obtuse about reality? Is it deliberate or just pathological ignorance.

    1. It can be both – – – – – –

    2. I don’t see the obvious difference. Mail ballots have more opportunities to be discarded, but that would show up in the precinct totals, same as anyone discarding ballots from precincts they don’t like. The only other way to discard is cherry picking the votes you don’t like, and that requires opening the envelopes. Absentee ballots here have their signatures checked independently of the tally, and any decent tally system would log the envelopes before being opened, again to catch discarding ballots by precinct rather than vote; and once logged from that precinct, any by-vote discarding would show as fewer votes counted than ballots received. And at that point, there is nothing different from in-person voting as far as counting the actual votes.

      Your turn. Show where I am wrong, show where there is more fraud possible with mail-on votes than in-person votes.

      1. It’s called a ground game. Pro-Candidate-X workers go door to door harvesting ballots. Or taking them from mailboxes and sending them in. Someone is checking thousands of signatures? In single-party precincts?

        Then as a double bonus, the poll workers can suppress voters who show up in person to vote, since their mail-in-ballot was already received.

        1. The problem is still that the precincts they target will have remarkably low totals. It’s still no different from ballot-box voting.

          You haven’t proved a think distinct about mail voting.

          1. There are countless ways to cheat a mail in system. There are far fewer ways to cheat an in person system.

            The biggest example, is zero confirmation about who filled out the ballot, was it the person, or a family member? Did the grandkid go fill out ballots for the grandparents in the home….then help the neighbors as well. Was the ballot stolen out of the mailbox and filled out by someone else. Did a paid operative go around the neighborhood and pay 20 bucks a ballot from people who would never have gone to the election office. The issue isnt absentee ballots, which have far less risk, simply because others dont know that you requested one. But the issue is the states that are looking to mail to everyone. Once the system is known, it will almost certainly be manipulated. Remember ACORN?

            But, regardless of the fraud, the most concerning issue is simply the appears of fraud potential or general distrust in the fairness of the election. Soap box, ballot box, ammo box. We all benefit by ensuring the soap box and ballot box are trusted.

            1. You missed the possibility of going through the voter rolls, which I believe are public documents, and requesting ballots in the name of people who haven’t voted for six or eight years. I’ll; bet it would even be possible to file change-of-address forms so these “people” could vote in critical districts instead of the ones shown on their voting records. Georgia purged its voter rolls of 1.5 million nonvoters, and the screeches of “voter suppression” by Democrats were earsplitting.

            2. The left is destroying trust in both the soapbox and ballot box.
              They don’t think Americans will fight back

  5. “While the evidence of such a scheme is hard to find, the president recently has voiced a more realistic concern: that a flood of mail-in ballots from Americans worried about visiting polling places in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic will overwhelm vote counters.’

    Oh, did he voice his concern? Golly gee, it’s too bad the sack of shit doesnt hold public office and isn’t in a position to work with Congress to do something about it. We are so fucked by the way.

    1. Elections are run by the states.

      1. Forget it. It’s an “Walking on water? Learn to swim Jackass!” criticism.

        He tweeted an open question, dropping an idea. He was accused of unilaterally proposing authoritarian action. Now that he was just voicing a concern, he’s just an ineffective concern troll.

      2. For one thing, the USPS is not run by the states.

        1. They don’t do the counting.

    2. Here’s an idea: fucking vote in person and stop being a pussy. Seriously, black people and women literally died to be able to go to the polls freely, I think we can all risk the possibility of the Rona.

  6. People who take Donald Trump’s statements seriously — particularly when his self-interest is involved — do not deserve respect.

    They are society’s anti-social, deplorable, can’t-keep-up losers.

    If they refrain from voting from mail because Trump said something stupid about it, where is the problem?

    1. You mean like his statements about delaying the election or “injecting bleach?”

      Not that I respected anyone who took those statements seriously either lol

      1. Well, considering that the injecting disinfections was followed up mere sentences later with him saying it was a bad idea and you had to listen to your doctor, I’d say it was actually a good idea, if not most clearly stated. The problem is that people have quoted the first half of his statement while deleting and hiding the second half. That gives the impression he was endorsing the very idea he was rejecting.

        1. Not a good idea to die on this mole hill

          1. It’s not an important statement aside from the clear and transparent falsehoods that we perpetuated about it. We had live video of his exact words since the very beginning, and people still are pretending that he did something that he very clearly said the opposite on.

            It’s a microcosm of this entire issue, where the media creates a huge problem out of think air, banking on the fact that people hate Trump so much that they can get away with absurd lies.

        2. THE PRESIDENT: Right. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning. Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it would be interesting to check that. So, that, you’re going to have to use medical doctors with. But it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.​So we’ll see. But the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute, that’s — that’s pretty powerful.

          ​And 10 Q’s later in the SAME briefing:​

          Q But I — just, can I ask about — the President mentioned the idea of cleaners? like bleach and isopropyl alcohol? you mentioned? There’s no scenario that that could be injected into a person, is there? I mean —​
          ACTING UNDER SECRETARY BRYAN: No, I’m here to talk about the findings that we had in the study. We won’t do that within that lab and our lab. So —​
          THE PRESIDENT: It wouldn’t be through injection. We’re talking about through almost a cleaning, sterilization of an area. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t work. But it certainly has a big effect if it’s on a stationary object.​

          HURR DURR, TRUMP TOLD PEOPLE TO INJECT BLEACH

  7. Those responsible for delivering mail-in ballots just endorsed Joe Biden for President. Let that sink in.
    https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/dems-want-mail-in-voting-postal-union-just-endorsed-joe-biden/

    Republicans have been concerned about possible manipulation of a mail-in voting scheme, and their concerns may be valid. Several stories have recently surfaced about postal employees’ attempts to influence elections utilizing their positions in the mail chain.

    For example, this past week a letter carrier in Fort Bend County, Texas allegedly threw a box of sheriff’s campaign mailers into a dumpster.

    According to WFLA, a business owner observed the incident on surveillance video. It showed the postal worker exit a vehicle carrying a large box, then approach a trash container behind a gate, come out empty-handed and then drive away. Shortly afterward, a stack of campaign fliers for Sheriff Troy Nehls was found in the trash container.

    “A federal employee, taking this and throwing it in a dumpster,” he said. “Not a good day, not a good day for America. And we really don’t know, has this mail carrier done it before?”

    1. “Those responsible for delivering mail-in ballots just endorsed Joe Biden for President.”

      So… who’s more likely to not receive their ballot- people in republican or democrat neighborhoods?

    2. That could have something to do with the other major party’s candidate threatening the funding of their paychecks.

      1. Irrelevant. We’re allowed to cut USPS spending w/o them helping the other side to cheat.

        1. They haven’t. Their union endorsed Biden; that’s all.

          1. Now now, you understand the drill.

            “Their union endorsed Biden” is secret codeword instructions for “steal ballots from Republicans”

            1. Since everything is apparently a dog whistle these days, I can understand his confusion.

            2. Oh, I see.

              1. This is where you point out that both sides love conspiracies. Many of the Democrats and the left insisted Bush planned 9/11, not to mention the Russian Conspiracy Hoax. And some on the right believe the USPS will steal the elections for the Democrats (though someone did post evidence that USPS workers have been throwing away mailers from candidates they didn’t like, which is somewhat worrisome, except no one pays attention to political mailers). No one side has a lock on kookiness. Also, voter fraud does happen, we don’t know the full extent, and it is totally reasonable to think it is not a major problem, or that it is a larger problem than we know. According to the current evidence, the former is the most plausible reality but let’s not pretend it doesn’t occur and hasn’t occurred likely in every election since Athen’s hay day.

                1. Don’t think I disagree with anything you just said.

                2. Trump tried to get to the bottom of the possibility of large-scale voter fraud but had to abandon it because demoncrap governors or secretaries of state refused to allow the information to be collected.
                  Now, which side wants the expose possible vote fraud, and which side doesn’t want it looked into?

  8. “Election fraud in the United States is very rare, but the most common type of such fraud in the United States involves absentee ballots,”

    And vote by mail is absentee ballots with some of the protections (like you have to explicitly ask for one) removed.

    1. Election Fraud convictions are rare, election fraud is not. You can find cases in almost every election of people who are dead voting. That is why the left focuses on convictions.

  9. There is no difference between absentee ballots (which must be requested) and just sending ballots to people, requested or otherwise?

    Seriously.

    You’re aware, given that somebody knows everybody will get a ballot, it’d be fairly easy to just drive around, open mailboxes, and take them.

    I know, it’s illegal. That frequently stops such things.

    1. Which states resist any efforts to clean up voter rolls, of dead people and those who have moved?
      Demoncrap run states.
      That should be enough evidence which side is dishonest in its voting schemes (and everything else they do).

  10. One question that I’ve posed, when ballots are rejected because signatures don’t match, is that considered fraud, potential fraud, or at least something that warrants an investigation?

    I know there was recently an article (which I previously linked) saying that young people don’t really ‘do’ signatures anymore, so their ballots are more likely to have mismatched signatures. But seriously, if a signature is sufficiently ‘off’ and that ballot is rejected, is there any followup to find out why the signature doesn’t match, or is that just ‘tossed out’ and the ‘fraud’ column isn’t checked?

    1. Nope, you have no idea what happens to your ballot once you put it in the mailbox and trust Democrat union members to not trash it like they trash mail all the time.

      1. Just for kicks, I did a google search for postal carriers destroying mail, and it returned about 10 different stories from the past two or so years. One involved a guy who rented storage unit and hid mail in it,vand one guy threw mail out or hid it because he just didn’t feel like delivering mail anymore. Between those two stories, that’s over 10,000 pieces of mail not delivered. About 1/3 of it was first-class mail and packages.

        I don’t think it’s fair to say all mailmen are pieces of shit. My current mailman is delightful. However, the fact that there are even a handful of shitty mailmen fucking with people’s mail is enough to make widespread mail in voting a bad idea.

        1. Yeah. Mail voting means we’re trusting the USPS to be basically compentent.

          Absentee ballots they can handle. When I was a poll worker we averaged a dozen out of 2,800 registered voters. What happens when that dozen becomes two thousand?

          1. Looks like government has some work to do to ensure the basic right to vote.

            1. Why should the right to vote be so much easier to exercise than the right to keep and bear arms?

              1. Because ballot counting machines don’t tend to explode people’s heads?

                1. Because ballot counting machines don’t tend to explode people’s heads?

                  Someone’s never taken a history class.

                2. Well tony, i think the 2016 ballot results did in fact explode quite a number of heads,

                  1. It shit a lot of pants too. World’s most powerful laxative.

            2. That’s fine.

              There’s no way THE GOVERNMENT does that work in less than three years, let alone months.

      2. Exactly. We need some sort of blockchain-type voting, where you can actually verify your vote was cast correctly.

    2. Rejecting unmatched signatures is voter suppression against those with shaky handwriting.

  11. I live in Northern California. My wife and I both use mail-in ballots, which we had to provide proofs to get. However, we got ballots from renters who had lived at our address before we moved here on retirement. If you move out of state, which they did, and do not notify the election commission, which they did not bother to do, the state will continue to mail ballots until they have not been returned for two or three years.
    If you want to follow the advice of Pogo and ‘vote early and often,’ a person could forge a signature and just send it along. The post office doesn’t care and what are the chances of a signature comparison?
    All that is just for those who have ballots sent and moved along. Those who never asked for one and have moved along must be a much larger group.

    1. Just fill them out proportionally based on political preferences in your county. You know, if it’s 75% D – 25% R and you get four extra ballots, that’s three ballots voting the D ticket and one voting the R ticket.

      Or you could fill them out all Libertarian. I mean, I would never advocate for fraud.

      1. That’s not fraud. If they send you the ballots, the ballots are yours.
        Especially if you fill them in libertarian; that just makes work for the poor postal worker who has to drag them to the precinct so they can be counted, ignored, and discarded.

      2. Go ahead. Throw your fraudulent vote away

    2. Did you get actual ballots for the renters? Or ballot applications?

    3. The chances of a signature comparison is 100%. The election commissioner in your California county is required to do it before accepting the ballot.

  12. It may be that mail-in voting actually decreases the chances of voter fraud-by-hacking of the machines.

    The whole lack of digital election security makes me worry. Going in a Luddite all-paper direction could be good.

    Of course if there’s some other point in the chain of custody of each vote that’s vulnerable to being hacked, it might not help.

    1. You leave off everyone knowing you got a ballot and when you got it. You are open to bribes and threats to vote, in your living room, for the candidate of someone else’s choice.

      Remember the “nice business here, hope nothing happens to it” BLM stories? “Nice legs your child has, hope nothing happens to them. How do we, BLM, get to watch you vote for?”

      1. That makes sense. I did see the BLM/extortion articles. How has Washington state handled it so far? I keep reading that they have been using “all mail-in” balloting for years. I’ll have to look it up.

      2. If you want an argument more amenable to the progressive front, I would reference abusive husbands. You know that abusive and domineering spouses will force their entire household to vote in the same way that they do. If they don’t take the entire family’s ballots directly, the others will vote under threat of beating.

        Don’t forget that the reason the Roman Republic fell into civil war was that the (public and open) election process was corrupted by armed gangs showing up and beating anyone who voted the “wrong” way.

        1. To the left, abuse is fine if the abuser is a leftist.

    2. It may be that mail-in voting actually decreases the chances of voter fraud-by-hacking of the machines.
      They’re equally terrible.

      Going in a Luddite all-paper direction could be good.
      This is what we do in Canada and it’s proven pretty reliable. Occasionally a ballot box or two disappears or magically appears, but on the whole they’re pretty reliable.
      Time consuming but reliable.

      1. I don’t know about Canada, but in this country if “a ballot box or two disappears or magically appears” is invariably to the benefit of one party – the demoncraps.

  13. While I must take a huge leap of faith that when I show up to a poll station that my vote will be, in fact, counted. But at least there is at least a reasonable faith that it will be. There is absolutely nothing in the “Vote-By-Mail” scheme that makes me believe that my ballot will ever be counted. Personally, I am against any and all absentee ballots, with the exception of our military members. Have to travel for work on the day of the election? Reschedule, or don’t vote. Election Day is not a surprise to anyone. We all know when it occurs and can easily schedule around it (this is also why I have always supported “Election Day” being “Election Weekend”…Everyone has all day Saturday and Sunday to make it to the polls). But to entrust an organization who is bleeding funds like an open chest wound ($8B in losses last year) who has every reason to support one party over the other because one of those parties support a government bailout that will help keep their jobs/retirement funds is just asinine.

    1. Absentee ballots usually favor Republicans (except for this year), so you are shooting yourself in the foot. Not really, though, because I am sure you will forget all about your opposition to absentee ballots when it once again favors Republicans.

      1. Absentee ballots, maybe. But ballots sent out like coupons for a donut sale to whoever happens to be at an address, not so much.

      2. This isn’t about absentee ballots.

        1. It literally is.

          1. Try to pay attention to what states are proposing. Youll look less like a fool.

    2. Have to travel for work on the day of the election? Reschedule, or don’t vote.

      Unfortunately, that isn’t practical for many people. But as you say, its no longer election day. Heck, it’s not even election weekend or election month. It’s election season given polls opening in late September in some states. With that, there really is no need for absentee voting.

  14. I’ll just leave this list of recent cases of election fraud, with sources, here.

    https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/yes-america-there-voter-fraud-these-recent-cases-prove-it

    1. http://twitter.com/lildv9/status/1290751651964506113?s=19

      Huge.
      I saw video of something like this in Turkey from years ago, but it was nowhere near the size of this thing

      1. The RADIUS of the fireball had to be something like 15 stories

          1. Maybe some dumbass Hezbollah bomb makers decided to light up a cig.

  15. “This is logistics,” said Democratic political consultant Bruce Gyory. “It isn’t rocket science.”

    We’ve got logistics coming out of our ears! What we need is fighting spirit!

    1. the same guys who couldn’t count 40,000 votes in Iowa in 40 days?

  16. “New York City’s primary election fiasco reveals gross incompetence rather than fraud.”

    Either way, it is clearly a bad idea to mail out ballots to unknown persons at unrequested addresses.

  17. Stuffing the ballot box is a great American tradition that probably goes further back than Gerrymandering. Stuffing the ballot box is probably as old as voting itself. And there’s no good reason to think that either party wouldn’t stuff the ballot box on principle. Is anybody claiming that politicians and their cronies are too honest to cheat on principle?

    Meanwhile, we’ve watched the Democrats go after Trump to the point of impeaching him over pure, unadulterated bullshit–with the obvious complicity of the FBI in obtaining bogus warrants to go after his campaign staff.

    Jesus Christ, if the Obama administration and the FBI did to you what they did to him, you’d assume the Democrats were out to get you, too–and you’d probably be right.

    If President Trump didn’t assume that the Democrats were trying to use mail-in ballots to cheat him out of a win, then he’d be an insane idiot. If Democrats anywhere and everywhere fail to cheat him out of winning, it isn’t because they aren’t trying or won’t cheat. It’s because they couldn’t do it well enough or on a large enough scale to win.

    1. 600 votes in the trunk of a Minnesota Buick agree.

      1. The Franken Offensive.

      2. Somebody show me the progressive volunteer who’s so honest that she wouldn’t stuff the ballot box–not even if she thought doing so would get Trump out of office.

        Somebody show me the social justice warrior who tore down statues, smashed the windows out of of businesses, and burned buildings down in the name of social justice–but is too honest to stuff the ballot box in the name of social justice.

        How much of a Pollyanna would I have to be to believe that the Democrats wouldn’t stuff the ballot box if they could? I can’t even pretend to be that gullible.

        Here’s an example from American history:

        “Kansas Territory was created by the Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854. The Act repealed the previous Federal prohibition on slavery in that area. Instead, the locally elected territorial legislature would decide.[2]

        At this time, many (probably most) of the settlers in Kansas opposed slavery. However, slavery advocates were determined to have their way regardless. When elections were held in Kansas Territory, bands of armed Ruffians seized polling places, prevented Free-State men from voting, and cast votes themselves (illegally, since they were Missourians).[2][3]

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Ruffian#%22Bleeding_Kansas%22

        You don’t roll the dice if you don’t have to! It’s just like with the OJ trial–they framed a guilty man. If anybody should be making anti-Trump observations about this, it’s that Trump can claim election fraud, and given that a hundred million people will be voting in hundreds of districts, the chances of him being right about some cases of electoral fraud are near 100%. It’s like me claiming that average temperature in the winter is likely to be lower than it was over the summer. The question isn’t IF IF IF they’ll try to stuff the ballot box but how big of a scale and whether it will make a difference.

        Surely we can all agree that assuming social justice warriors and progressives care more about their personal integrity or the integrity of elections than they do about social justice, environmentalism, etc. is fucking crazy. They want to stuff the ballot box, and they will if they can. The mass of mail-in ballots gives them more opportunity to do so than they would have otherwise, and if Trump wins, the Democrats will be screaming about election fraud, too. It’s virtually guaranteed that whomever loses will scream about election fraud–and they’ll find plenty of evidence of it happening because it happens every election.

        1. Shorter Ken:
          “Surely, we can all agree that the people I don’t like will act like the caricature of them that I have constructed in my head?”

          1. “The mass of mail-in ballots gives them more opportunity to do so than they would have otherwise, and if Trump wins, the Democrats will be screaming about election fraud, too. It’s virtually guaranteed that whomever loses will scream about election fraud–and they’ll find plenty of evidence of it happening because it happens every election.”

            —-Ken Shultz

            That’s what I actually wrote.

            P.S. Shorter ChemJeff: “Herp-a [feelings] Derp!”

            1. This is also what you wrote, Ken:

              Surely we can all agree that assuming social justice warriors and progressives care more about their personal integrity or the integrity of elections than they do about social justice, environmentalism, etc. is fucking crazy.

              In other words, you assume your opponents will act illegally and with bad intent. You dehumanize them and reduce them to caricatures.

              The progressives that you hate are saying the exact same thing about you – “surely those Trump-voting racist hicks have no qualms about stuffing the ballot box if it helps their orange baboon cult leader get re-elected and stopping SOSHALISHM, right?” They are dehumanizing you in the same way you are dehumanizing them.

              You could either treat people as individuals, or not. When you don’t, don’t be surprised when you reap what you sow.

              1. You think you’re making a point, don’t you?

                Yes, both sides have people who care more about their issues than they do about the integrity of elections.

                That was one of my points.

                And it means that there isn’t anything crazy or stupid about President Trump assuming that the mass of mail-in ballots will present a ripe opportunity for abuse by the progressives and social justice warriors who oppose him, you emotional joke.

                1. Yes, both sides have people who care more about their issues than they do about the integrity of elections.

                  That was one of my points.

                  Umm no it wasn’t Ken. Unless your description of “the social justice warrior who tore down statues, smashed the windows out of of businesses, and burned buildings down in the name of social justice” is some weird code phrase for MAGA cultist Trump activists willing to stuff the ballot box on behalf of their cult leader. You didn’t BSAB anything. As usual it’s a 5,000-word defense of Trump claiming to be from some impartial objective when you are just sliding more and more into the clutches of Team Red all while running in fear to Daddy Trump who will save you from the MARXIST SOSHALISHSTS.

                  1. Do you really not understand his point?

                    1. For a leftist to admit they understand a point means they have to admit to being wrong.
                      They can’t do that.

              2. Except they don’t.
                Leftists like you whine about voter “suppression” and tell us how black people are incapable of obtaining IDs.
                You have no integrity, jeff.

                1. They don’t what? They don’t believe you are above stuffing the ballot box yourself?

                  black people are incapable of obtaining IDs.

                  No one argues this strawman.

                  1. That’s not an argument they ever make. Maybe you can get them to work it into the talking points though.

                    “No one argues this strawman.”
                    Yes, they do. All the fucking time. Why are you and your fellow travelers so adamantly opposed to voter ID?

                    1. I am still confused about what is the argument that “they” never make. Whatever.

                      And as far as voter ID’s go, I am actually supportive of the concept of voter ID’s. Because if one were to devise a voting system from the ground up, in today’s world, it would be kind of silly not to have some type of secure voter identification system. But at least I understand the argument of the other side, and not just blithely dismiss it as some strawman that doesn’t exist. The voter ID requirement should not be a poll tax in disguise, plus, any requirement that is put upon voters will disproportionately impact those with lesser means to meet those requirements, whether it is in terms of time or money or both. So the requirements should be as minimal as possible while still retaining basic integrity, and the state should go to great lengths to help people meet those requirements. What if people from the city clerk’s office went door to door to unregistered/un-ID’d individuals to help them meet the requirements and become registered voters? That is the type of thing that should be occurring if there is going to be a voter ID requirement.

                    2. Way to make the argument “they never make”

                      Absolutely hilarious

                    3. I’m sorry, did you somewhere read in my text that I wrote “black people are incapable of obtaining IDs”? Because I’m pretty sure that’s not what I wrote.

                    4. Nardz, do you disagree with either of these two statements?

                      1. The voter ID requirement should not be a poll tax in disguise (this is illegal, you know)
                      2. Acknowledging that a voter ID requirement will disproportionately affect those with lesser means to meet the requirement, the state should go to great lengths to help individuals to meet that requirement

            2. Good thing the human species invented the concept of evidence.

              1. You seem to be unaware of the fact that the FBI obtained a bogus warrant to perpetrate surveillance against his campaign staff based on opposition research from the Hillary Clinton campaign that they knew to be bogus.

                If President Trump didn’t assume the Democrats were out to get him after that, that would mean he was crazy or stupid.

                Meanwhile, there will be evidence of voter fraud on both sides (as I already stated) because there is evidence of voter fraud in every national election–on both sides. The only question is whether there will be convincing evidence that there was enough of it to make a difference in the outcome. Predicting voter fraud is shooting fish in a barrel.

                1. Ken, why are you so invested about how Trump may or may not FEEL about Democrats supposedly “out to get him”? Does he need you to validate his feelings?

                  1. Is the subject of the article Trump’s fanciful conspiracy theories?

                    Under the circumstances, conspiracy theories may be entirely appropriate.

                    There was a time when if you told me that the FBI used opposition research from the Hillary campaign to get a FISA warrant to bug candidate Trump’s campaign staff, I’d have thought it was a fanciful conspiracy theory. After seeing that actually happen, the theory that the progressives aren’t out to get him is probably the most fanciful theory of all.

                    1. Now you are defending Trump’s paranoia. Got it, Ken.

                      It’s only a matter of time until you start wearing the MAGA hat and start believing the QAnon conspiracy theories.

                    2. Hey Ken… progressives are out to get Donald Trump.

                      Also law enforcement was out to get him when he was committing massive election crimes.

                    3. Massive election crimes that they never found evidence of and no one was convicted of? Now who is selling conspiracy theories?

                    4. Maybe presidents should be subject to a less dog-and-pony-show-like process than impeachment when they commit high crimes.

                    5. Again you haven’t demonstrated high crimes. So, what less dog and pony show, an actual trial where all the hearsay evidence would have been dismissed out of hand and rules inadmissible, leaving no case against him, other than an ambiguous transcript? Yes, that would have resulted in the same outcome.

                    6. Jeff is totes not a leftist sympathizer you guys!

                2. Donald Trump is obviously crazy and stupid.

                  The president is trying to undermine faith in the election because he can read polls. Focus on the real problems that exist lest you damage your credibility as a partisan hack who doesn’t actually care about anybody’s rights.

          2. No Ken is pointing out the left’s long hisof vote fraud. You ignore that because you are incapable of seeing fault in the left.

            Fuck off Jeff.

            1. Why don’t we just forbid Democrats from running for office, just in case? You know all that futurecrime they plan on committing.

              Meanwhile the president is engaging in the most obvious exercise in delegitimizing the vote imaginable because he thinks he’s going to lose.

            2. Oh, John, here’s a good one. I’m sure you’ll enjoy this.

              https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/16491-two-sentenced-in-massachusetts-vote-fraud-case

              Former East Longmeadow Selectman Enrico J. Villamaino III previously pleaded guilty to 11 charges and was sentenced to one year in the Hampden County Correctional Center plus one year of probation and 200 hours of community service. Villamaino’s time in the correctional center was reduced to four months with the remainder of the one-year sentence suspended.

              The guilty pleas by Villamaino and Llewellyn relate to a scheme to generate absentee ballot votes for Villamaino in the 2012 Republican primary, where he was seeking the nomination for state representative. Villamaino lost to Marie Angelides.

              According to masslive.com, Hampden County prosecutor Mark Mastroianni described this crime as an “extraordinarily serious offense” when addressing Hampden Superior Court Judge Mary Lou Rup during the sentencing phase for Villamaino.

              A witness told The New American:

              Villamaino used his influence as a selectman to get Llewellyn hired by the town clerk’s office where she would have access to the voter registration database.

              Party affiliations of 285 registered Democrat voters were changed to unenrolled (independent of any party). That made these voters eligible to vote in either the Democrat or Republican Primary.

              Republican absentee primary ballots were requested for these 285 voters.

              The 285 absentee ballot requests were received and processed on the same day. Villamaino and Llewellyn volunteered to take the 285 absentee ballots to the local post office to be mailed, but the witness believes the ballots were never mailed.

            3. And by the way, I don’t even deny that Democrats have had their fair share of sketchy voting practices, up to and including voter fraud. But don’t for a minute think that Team Red is above sinking to the level of voter fraud, because they’re not.

            4. “No Ken is pointing out the left’s long hisof vote fraud.”

              Funny that this massive amount of voter fraud wasn’t a major issue until fat fuck lost the popular vote, then it was a huge issue that went from 10-20 cases to millions of votes (the amount he happened to lose by)

              And funny that it is now a massive issue and concern again that fat fuck is completely underwater in all the swing state polls, as a pre-excuse for losing in November.

              It’s a conspiracy put out by a guy that dabbles in conspiracy theories, to people that believe them, as an excuse for his inadequacy. That you have bought it hook line and sinker is a product of your gullibility and desire for the leader to be right. At this point you guys are looking more and more like Scientologists with LRon.

              If you and your cult were super concerned about mail in voting being a threat to the country and our democracy you have all certainly been massive pussies leading up to this point, letting a threat to the republic go unchecked all this time.

              1. That Trump cares more about voter fraud as the prospect of him losing increases isn’t a particularly interesting insight.

                Are you saying that the progressives and the social justice warriors aren’t out to get him?

                Are you saying that a hundred million mail-in ballots doesn’t increase the likelihood of voter fraud?

                1. You sound as unhinged as you accuse Trump of being. Maybe you are as large a cultist as those who you label cultist. FYI, before you hurl the Trumper insult I will inform you that I voted for Johnson, and am still leaning towards Jorgenson (if not her, I plan on leaving it blank). I’d thought I’d throw that in their because, based on the level of puerility in your post, I figured you think in only terms of those who support Trump and those who hate him.

                  1. I think maybe you intended to direct this comment to someone else?

                    1. Yes I did fucking squirrels are bad.

                    2. Meant for Shotgunbimbo.

              2. Ignore the fact that Republicans have been pushing voter ID laws for over a decade. Ignore the fact that voter fraud has long been suspected in Democratic strongholds like Chicago and New Orleans. Ignore the fact that voter fraud was the theme behind a number of movies, including Black Sheep (David Spade and Chris Farley, classic). Yes, if you ignore all of these facts your thesis that no Republicans or anyone else for that matter, ever worried about voter fraud before Trump was elected. Jesus H. Christ, put down the crack pipe and actually use some facts.

                1. Meant for Shotgunbimbo (not a type error).

                2. This is part of Trump’s scenario that doesn’t make sense, practically. Trump defenders will point to corruption in elections in solidly blue states. Sure that’s bad and corrupt, but because of the electoral system it will also not have any effect on the Presidential section.

                  1. And I don’t disagree with your point. I just not a big fan of people pretending like those who oppose all mail in ballots are idiots that don’t have valid points.

                    1. You won’t find me doing that.

                      Increasing the scale of mail-in ballots might make it impossible to get the election results right away, so no more staying up until midnight to see who the TV networks call.

                      Some states will fuck up counting.

                      Trump isn’t helping sell the point because he isn’t arguing it well. He tweets about intentional fraud when that’s not the big, new problem.

                    2. “Trump isn’t helping sell the point because he isn’t arguing it well. He tweets about intentional fraud when that’s not the big, new problem.”

                      Hmm. I’m sure you have a cite for your claim, right?

              3. In fairness the voter fraud paranoia on the right predates Trump. But Trump’s vanity and narcissism has certainly fueled it, as he insists that he must win at everything, and when he doesn’t win, it’s because someone cheated, and not because he just didn’t earn victory.

                1. You can hardly call it paranoia when you just posted multiple examples of voter fraud actually existing. And I am sure if I bothered I could post as many examples from the left. Hell, this story even admits it exists but states its effects are overstated. However, the proof of that is generally convictions and not credible accusations. No, Trump didn’t lose the popular vote because of illegal immigrants voting. But some voter fraud did occur in 2016, 2012, 2008, 2004 etc. Remember Franken won only after 6000 ballots were magically found in someone’s trunk the next day. Accusations of voter fraud were widespread (and actually verified as a number of dead and ineligible voters were found on the voting roll and had cast voted according to voting records). There was also a large number of discovered ballots and several recounts that the Democratic candidate kept demanding until she finally took the lead (I believe it was the 4th recount) and then she sued (and won) in King County to stop the Republican from requesting another recount. It should be noted a total of 6 counties discovered uncounted ballots, all of them absentee ballots. Washington state also allows election officials to determine the intent of the voter if they rule the ballot unreadable by the machines, then correct the ballot so the machines can read them.

                  1. The right wing depictions of voter fraud is blown way out of proportion to its actual effects in influencing the results of elections. If you listen to right-wing media, every single close election is just Al Franken redux. This just follows their usual pattern of demagoguery. They can’t prove in any analytical way that voter fraud is such a rampant problem that it changes the results of elections more than maybe once or twice, so instead they rely on anecdotes and hype and fearmongering. Kris Kobach tried to find voter fraud in Kansas under every rock that he could, and he found like a couple of people who made honest mistakes, and none of those instances changed the outcome of any election. No one is claiming that there is zero voter fraud. But its effects on changing the outcome of an election are next to zero.

                    With the right wing, it’s just fear all the way down. Fear that illegals are voting, fear of librulz destroying America, fear of furriners stealing jerbs, fear of change. And I refuse to endorse that type of crap any more. Can you or anyone else honestly tell me what is Donald Trump’s affirmative case for re-election is, that stands on its own merits and isn’t just a reaction to fear of “the Left”? It is all they have now. And the voter fraud paranoia is just part of the same pattern.

                    1. Yes, you are so insightful. Conservatives are just evil people and should all be shot or gassed because some of them like Trump. Oh heil the non partisan insightfulness of Guru ChemJeff. You fucking tribalist hypocrite. You just fucking disgust me with you implied hatred of Republicans and Conservatives. And your smug attitude that you are better and smarter than them. Yes the right is paranoid and racist and evil why not put them all on cattle cars and ship them to far western Alaska.

                    2. Can you honestly tell me Biden’s that isn’t “I am not Trump”? And both sides do an equal job of fear baiting. Oh yeah you excused Biden saying that Romney was going to put blacks back in chains, or that the Republicans just want to reinstitute segregation and slavery, and that if blacks don’t vote for Biden they aren’t black. Because you are a fucking hypocrite and tribalist asshat. Just as bad as TheRev and JesseAz. But the difference with Jesse is he doesn’t try to pretend that he is anything but a partisan. You dishonestly claim to be rationale in your assessment but are anything but.

                    3. For the record, I don’t think conservatives should be shot or gassed. I just don’t think they ought to be listened to very much when it comes to issues of liberty.

                      You just fucking disgust me with you implied hatred of Republicans and Conservatives.

                      Why is that, Mr. JoJo Voter? Does Team Red not deserve a lot of scorn and contempt?

                    4. And as for no one claiming that there is no voter fraud, several left wing media has claimed exactly that, that voter fraud is a myth. So once again you ignore bad behavior on the left was castigating the right for the exact same activity that you ignored on the left.

                    5. Show me just one article where the author claims that voter fraud does not exist at all.

                    6. And why does criticism of the right get you so upset? Why should they be above criticism?

                    7. And I must say, it is intensely amusing to see you write lengthy diatribes about how I am not worthy of the pedestal that you put me on and I never claimed to be on.

                      I’ll be honest, I’m also not a fashion model either. Woe is me.

                    8. Chemjeff, devout believer in systemic racism and anthropogenic global climate change apocalypse, speaks of others being fearful.

                      Lol

                    9. Woe is indeed you, Jeff.
                      And if you kept it to yourself, that’d be fine.
                      But you’re weak and resentful, thus you insist on imosing your misery on others.
                      Man up and keep your bullshit to yourself

                    10. Look out, Nardz, but there might be an illegal hiding under your bed. Or maybe it’s Antifa. Or maybe it’s an Antifa illegal! Oh noez!

                    11. It isn’t your criticism of the right so much as the fact that you accuse them of tactics that you forgive the Democrats for and that you describe them as uneducated and irrelevant and that you just admitted you feel they should be ignored because you disagree with them. It is your smugness and your hypocrisy that pisses me off. It is your intellectual narrow-minded behavior that pisses me off. It is your blatant tribalism that pisses me off.

                    12. I don’t put you on a pedestal I point out your total lack of self awareness and your blind partisanship. I dislike progressives but would never claim they should be ignored or cut out of a debate.vor that they are irrelevant. That is just bigotry when you claim that about conservatives. As for lengthy diatribes, you know what they say about glass houses and rock throwing right?

                    13. And as for team Red they no more deserve ridicule than team Blue. Unlike you I admit both are equally bad, but you maintain team Blue is better and defend them and parrot their talking points non-stop. I honestly think you lack even the self awareness to realize how partisan you really are. And no, I admit I am a Libertarian leaning conservative but left the party because big McCain, Romney and Trump, all who don’t value liberty anymore than the Democrats do. So unlike you, I believe both sides have some pretty strong aversions to personal liberties.

                    14. First – Team Red and Team Blue are not equally bad. Team Red is worse. Team Red is in the grips of a cult of personality fueled by paranoia and fear. Team Blue has ideas – many of which are bad ideas, granted – and some demagoguery on the side. Team Red has all demagoguery and next to zero ideas. Plato warned about demagoguery 2500 fucking years ago. This ought to be concerning to anyone who values rational decision-making, don’t you think?

                      Second, I think conservatives shouldn’t be listened to very much on issues of liberty, because they have proven themselves to be very unreliable defenders of liberty, especially now. For fucks sake Trump wants to throw people in jail right now for burning a flag. They’ve made it plainly clear that the only liberty they are passionately and sincerely interested in is the right to own guns. So bully for them that they support one fundamental right. When it comes to the others, they can sit in the corner. And for the record, I don’t think progressives should be consulted when it comes to matters of free market capitalism either.

                      And third, yeah you kinda have put me on some sort of pedestal in order to criticize me from there. You put me in the role as some sort of snooty snobby Ivy League elitist looking down his nose on flyover country, and then you criticize me for my alleged snobbiness. How convenient. I am the one who wants to free individuals from the chains that bind them. All of them. That includes red state Republicans and blue state Democrats. What I don’t do is pretend that one group has a more legitimate voice about what America is than another. I fully reject the idea of a “real America”, I find the idea offensive on its face.

                      So there.

                    15. Now, if you’ll permit me to make a few observations about you, soldiermedic.

                      First, you take criticism about Team Red way too personally. They aren’t you. I am sure you have lots of Team Red buddies. And for the record, I have a lot of Team Blue buddies. When I hear someone here say “OMG The Left wants to throw Republicans into camps!” I just laugh because it is not at all what my Team Blue friends are like, they would be horrified by even the thought of such a thing. So when I refer to Team Red broadly I am not referring specifically to you or your buddies, so relax.

                      Second, you seem way too much on board with embracing the Team Red narratives. Such as the OMG Marxist BLM crapola. If you have the time, please read this article:

                      https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2015-steve-bannon/

                      It is about Steve Bannon and his time when he ran Breitbart. It was published in 2015, before the election. The article is illuminating in how he chose to run Breitbart. He deliberately chose to highlight stories that would rile up his base. For example:

                      Breitbart’s genius was that he grasped better than anyone else what the early 20th century press barons understood—that most readers don’t approach the news as a clinical exercise in absorbing facts, but experience it viscerally as an ongoing drama, with distinct story lines, heroes, and villains. Breitbart excelled at creating these narratives, an editorial approach that’s lived on. “When we do an editorial call, I don’t even bring anything I feel like is only a one-off story, even if it’d be the best story on the site,” says Alex Marlow, the site’s editor in chief. “Our whole mindset is looking for these rolling narratives.” He rattles off the most popular ones, which Breitbart News covers intensively from a posture of aggrieved persecution. “The big ones won’t surprise you,” he says. “Immigration, ISIS, race riots, and what we call ‘the collapse of traditional values.’ But I’d say Hillary Clinton is tops.”

                      When you realize this is what’s going on, it is easy to see what right-wing media is really like. They aren’t presenting the truth, they are not even pretending to present the truth. They are presenting a narrative. Don’t fall for it, you are smarter than that.

                    16. You just said that the left has more ideas and is better than the right, than you claim you don’t see one side as better than the other, these are contradictory statements. And know you aren’t ivy league, you are barely community college. And no not on a pedestal. I actively detest you. Like I’ve never detested anyone ever in my life. You make me almost physically ill. That isn’t a pedestal I have more respect the what I scrape off the bottom of my boots after kicking out the barn. You aren’t even consistent. First you state the right (and here you generalize all on the right) are all cultist with no ideas than claim you don’t claim that one side has a more legitimate voice than the other. Right after you claim that the right is worse than the left. Do you realize the level of cognitive dissonance this takes?

                    17. And the reason I detest you, to be totally honest is because at one time I actually respected you as an honest voice even when I disagreed with you. But I’ve come to realize that you are just a tribalist that pretends not to be. That is why I detest you.

                    18. You just said that the left has more ideas and is better than the right, than you claim you don’t see one side as better than the other, these are contradictory statements.

                      I do see one side as better than the other. I think Team Red is worse than Team Blue. I said that from the outset. The contradiction is only in your head.

                      And so let me get this straight. Because I have failed to live up to the expectations that you placed upon me in your own mind, I have earned your enduring enmity. You’re taking it out on me because I’m not the person you thought I was? If you think I’m just some sort of progressive, then fine – I’m not, but whatever. But I am the same person I have always been. There was never any attempt to deceive you or anyone else. If you feel deceived or betrayed, it is only by the false expectations you placed upon me, and not by any deliberate act from myself.

                    19. And don’t think you are cute by using the condescending insult that I’m way to smart. As for buying a narrative, I don’t watch TV news and my primary news sources are Reason and Quillette. I also read RCP so I can read a story from both sides of an issue. I make up my own mind. And as for taking your attacks on the right personally, no I detest your hypocrisy, generalizations, dehumanization and tribalism that you apply to the right. As for buying the Breitbart or Foxnews narrative, this is the kind of personal attacks you launch at people. You don’t call them names you imply that they are too stupid and brainwashed. It is not nearly as deceptive or clever as you think it is, everyone is fully aware that these are personal attacks, meant to ridicule those who you disagree with. Unlike you, I wont play that game and just call you a fucking asshole partisan. Because I don’t try to hide my motives. And as for BLM they did claim to be Marxist but removed it from their homepage. And they are associated with marxist groups and support a lot of statist policies. You claim they aren’t Marxist. But that is your opinion not a fact. My opinion is that they sound awfully Marxist. Again, it is an opinion. I don’t try to act as if I know what every member believes. But you expect everyone to accept your opinion as fact rather than just admitting it’s an opinion and that others have valid evidence that argues against your opinion. And if you really don’t mean to generalize, then stop fucking generalizing and stop fucking demonizing and stop with the faux intellectual personal attacks, smugness and condescension.

                    20. So I am starting to get it now. And to be honest it is a big reason why I am so critical of Team Red. I feel betrayed by them as well. Believe it or not I used to be a Republican voter. I liked the spirit of the Tea Party anyway, even if some of the people there were genuine cranks. I thought that their opposition to Obama’s agenda was principled at the time. And then Trump happened, and I realized that their opposition to Obama’s agenda was based on personality and not principle. I felt greatly betrayed by Team Red’s embrace of Trump. How could they support such an obvious con-man? A guy who rejects most conservative principles and has as his main selling point being mean to Mexicans? But they did it. I can never see the Republican Party in the same way again. And I know that not all conservatives are alike. Sometimes I go a bit too overboard in my criticism of Team Red. There are conservatives out there who genuinely do hold conservative principles and who only voted for Trump out of strategic reasons. I get that. But then again there are also “conservatives” out there who are defending actions from Trump that, if Obama had done them, would have sent them into paroxysms of rage. I have to realize myself that Team Red is what it has always been and my beef with them is largely based on the expectations that I created for them in my own mind that they failed to live up to, but they were expectations that they were not supposed to live up to anyway since they were only a product of my own invention.

                      I do not think all conservatives are paranoid and afraid. I do think there are many conservatives however who are strongly motivated by fear of “the Left”. Is that a fair statement?

                    21. As for buying the Breitbart or Foxnews narrative, this is the kind of personal attacks you launch at people. You don’t call them names you imply that they are too stupid and brainwashed. It is not nearly as deceptive or clever as you think it is, everyone is fully aware that these are personal attacks, meant to ridicule those who you disagree with.

                      I think many people are *uninformed* on many issues. That incIudes myself – I don’t claim to have all the answers either. I think that the right-wing media machine does a very good job dressing up its reporting as “fact-based” when it is really just agenda-driven. Look at the drivel that is posted in the morning news thread every single morning. I think that if a person accepts Fox News reporting at face value, that this person is falling for a narrative and is not well informed. I could say the same about MSNBC for example, but that isn’t really an issue around here, where we are all subjected to right-wing talking points all day long as a matter of course and the most “left wing” source that is ever cited is maybe CNN or Vox, which is “establishment center-left” rather than left-wing. If you think that me pointing out that Fox News is selling a narrative and not news is some type of insult, well, it’s not. It may be a little bit condescending, but it isn’t intended as an insult.

                      I do sometimes get a bit carried away in my criticism of the right wing. But as I mentioned above, it is almost as if I felt like a “spurned lover” when the movement as a whole decided to turn away from any semblance of principle and decided to embrace the unprincipled narcissistic clownish buffoon Trump the huckster.

                    22. If you don’t realize how contradictory those statements are I can’t really help you. As for narrative. Your examples of center left are just as much narrative, especially Box. CNN has been more busted several times for pushing false narratives. The first I can remember was from 1994 when they did a cut shot of an AR-15 firing and then edited it to make it look like they rounds were shredding a solid cement block and then compared it to a bolt action .223 where the rounds couldn’t penetrate and than stated that the AR-15 was more powerful than the equivalent bolt action (granted the 5.56 mm is slightly more powerful but only marginally than the .223). It turned out the faked the entire evidence that they were shooting the cement block with a much more high powered rifle to shred it and they edited it to fake it was the AR. CNN has been caught doing this kind of shit multiple times. So, no that you think they are center left but Fox is far right is a pretty good explanation of your partisan understanding. And hell you accuse me of watching FNC and I haven’t watched it in 5 years. So that just shows your ignorance and inability to take pushback on your narrative.

                    23. Well, I have no idea what you are talking about when it came to the incident in 1994 with the guns on CNN. I wasn’t watching CNN in 1994. I also fail to see what that has to do with whether CNN’s politics are “center left” or not. Were they shilling for Bernie during the Democratic primaries? I seem to recall that they were assisting Hillary vs. Bernie during the 2016 primaries.

                    24. And hell you accuse me of watching FNC and I haven’t watched it in 5 years.

                      Actually, I didn’t accuse you of watching Fox News. This is one more instance of where you supposedly read something that wasn’t there.

                    25. Just some constructive criticism: If you don’t want people to think you’re an asshole, maybe don’t collectivize one corner of the political spectrum while claiming not to be a collectivist.

        2. Oh, my god. A woman named Jill, in our old neighborhood. She was always the first to show up for every civic duty, including polling place worker. She would never, ever mess with the vote — she has, like, religious level reverence for the democratic (small D) process.

          1. “(small D)”

            Lol
            Interesting
            Obviously not a typo, since you had to intentionally capitalize the “d”
            Funny stuff

  18. sit down, stay home. mail away your rights.

    Peter Tosh weeps.

  19. This is just completely ridiculous. If the government cannot even run an election correctly, what is the fucking point?

    You have one side which wants to deliberately suppress the vote by sowing chaos and distrust in the system. Then you have the other side who wants to leap headlong into a system that hasn’t been tested at scale. While the rest of us just looks on in amazement. Get your acts together, fucking retards. What other first-world country has this level of confusion concerning elections? It is absurd.

    This is another thing that a good libertarian candidate could campaign on. “Small and Competent Government”. Reduce the size and scope of government, but those things that government ought to do, it does them exceptionally well. No more fucking around with basic duties like delivering mail or organizing an election. Just do your jobs.

    Sheesh. What a bunch of morons.

    1. The left owns election fraud, shill, and always has

      1. https://www.npr.org/2019/07/30/746800630/north-carolina-gop-operative-faces-new-felony-charges-that-allege-ballot-fraud

        But I’m sure you know all about this case.

        In any event, what is mainly going on here from Team Red is to try to manipulate the vote via legal means. Team Blue does it too, but it seems to be Team Red’s preferred means of manipulating electoral outcomes.

        1. If the right is just as bad, that is more reason to reject this not less. You really are stupid

          1. We need honest elections. Making people stand in line for an hour during a pandemic all on the same day is a catastrophe waiting to happen. The only course of action, one we should all agree to, is to make mail voting as secure and convenient as possible. If government can’t run elections properly then we are even more of a failed state than the tinpot dumpster fire grabbing power left and right would suggest.

            1. >>We need honest elections.
              >>during a pandemic

              you first.

              1. I have been voting absentee for a year. They still require my ID, and any anxiety I have about the ballot not making its is destination is hardly stronger than if I had to deal with geriatric poll workers in person, but if you have such a problem, there will be the normal option available to you.

                1. honest about there being a pandemic.

                  absentee voting is fine it requires an application.

                  1. You don’t have to adopt a completely batshit distinction just because Trump vomited out some word soup in response to criticism that he is against the very method of voting he and everyone around him has used multiple times.

                    There is not actually a meaningful distinction here unless you’re trying to confuse stupid people into believing Trump isn’t a bloody hypocrite.

                    1. absentee ballots have a process. mail-in ballots do not. apples are red. oranges are orange.

                    2. Mail-in ballots don’t have a process?

                    3. Dillinger, they are exactly the same thing.

                      The only thing new under the sun this year is that (a) a lot more people are doing mail-in ballots, (b) some states are encouraging mail-in by sending every registered voter a mail-in application, which makes for a lot, lot more mail-in ballots in those states.

                      Trump himself is not arguing it very well. He veers too much into voter fraud, which is a problem that has been around a long time, when the big, indisputable problem is the increase in scale of mail-in ballots.

                      He paints it as sinister Democratic plot rather than a challenge he could help out with by making sure the Post Office is equipped to handle the increased volume, and probably a lot more things he could do if he were helpful rather than divisive.

          2. I think Tony is right in this case – what we need are honest elections. So stop bitching about paranoid fantasies about how your mailman is a secret communist in the pay of the DNC stealing everyone’s ballots, and offer some constructive ideas about how to create honest elections.

            I am personally fine with all-mail voting, as long as each voter can be guaranteed to have his/her vote counted. If you don’t trust your mailman, then there should be an option for you to deposit your ballot directly at the city clerk’s office. If having secure and reliable all-mail voting means that USPS needs more resources, then let’s do that. If having secure and reliable all-mail voting means that we won’t know the result of the election on election night, then I’m willing to wait.

            But if you think all-mail voting is a terrible idea, then let’s hear your ideas. It would help if your ideas don’t also entail forcing everyone to wait in plague lines on election day.

            1. Surprise. ChemJeff agrees with Tony and favors the Democrats plan once again. You could knock me over with a feather. And of course his answer is more resources (e.g. funding) to the USPS. But he is totes a libertarian, really guys.

              1. Tony happens not to be lost in paranoid delusions about mailmen being in the secret employ of the DNC and stealing everyone’s ballots.

                You can either be part of a constructive conversation, or you can just bitch and offer paranoia.

                Do you support government money being used to conduct reliable and secure elections? If so then you’re as much of a “big government statist” as I am on this issue.

                1. “Tony happens not to be lost in paranoid delusions about mailmen being in the secret employ of the DNC and stealing everyone’s ballots.
                  You can either be part of a constructive conversation, or you can just bitch and offer paranoia.”

                  You could act like an adult for once and not drag strawmen around and quit poisoning the well.
                  But as as lefty, that’s asking entirely too much.

                2. First, I support the system of the USPS that existed for most of the 19th century, were the post masters generals were only in charge of contracting private companies and citizens to deliver mail, rather than a huge government bureaucracy. It worked quite well and was self funding. If we do all mail in ballots, let’s contracg FedEx or UPS to do it, they offer tracking from pickup to delivery that is far more dependable than what the USPS offers.
                  Second, I would not call your dismissal of everyone who disagrees with you (some of whom have very solid concerns, rather you agree or not) constructive. I would label almost every single one of your posts as sophistry. Notice Ken said both sides would stuff ballots if given the chance. Rather than acknowledge it, you dismissed it (and then said much the same thing after posting numerous stories about Republicans involved in voter fraud). So even by your repudiation of Nardz, as John pointed out, you basically admit voter fraud is already a problem. The fact that New York still hasn’t counted ballots and the fact that voter fraud already exists, dismissing anyone’s concerns about all mail balloting it intellectually dishonest.

                  1. I am getting a little bit fucking tired of people who do NOTHING BUT “raise concerns”. Where I come from, that is called bitching, and it’s not productive.

                    And now you are just making this personal. When it’s not bitching, it’s ad hominem.

                    If we do all mail in ballots, let’s contracg FedEx or UPS to do it, they offer tracking from pickup to delivery that is far more dependable than what the USPS offers.

                    BuT WhAt If ThE UPS GuY Is A DeMoRAT ???????

                    1. You make it personal all the time. You call people names all the time. You attack conservatives and anyone to the right of you all the time. And you are getting tired of it. Ask me if I fucking care? God you are such a fucking narcissist. Really. You are. No one cares what you are getting tired of, put on your big boy pants and cowboy up. For fuck sake. Act like a fucking man. And stop whining about personal attacks when you love to denigrate the right at every chance you get, especially those who support Trump. You denigrate anyone who has ever even entertained the idea that Trump isn’t literal Hitler. You fucking crybaby hypocrite, if you can’t handle the truth I don’t fucking care!!! Your bitching about personal attacks and your hypocrisy just fucking piss me off. Your smugness, sophomoric attempts at deep intellectualness, and your narcissistic behavior have gotten to the point that almost no one besides Tony and White Knight can stand you. Get a clue dude. You aren’t nearly as intelligent as you think (hell there are a number of people far more insightful than you that post here regularly, many of who I would describe as more left leaning Libertarians) nor are you very honest. You love using sophistry, hyperbole, straw man, etc. If there is a logical fallacy you don’t commonly used, it is one I’ve never heard of. You sound like a freshman poli-sci major. Even when I agree with you, I almost wish I didn’t because you are intellectually stunted and dishonest.

                    2. And fuck off with that implying I am opposed to this because I like Trump. Fuck Trump. He is a total asshat, so is Biden. Fuck them both. As for my point about UPS, and FedEx, I noticed you didn’t disprove it so much as make it personal right after whining about people making things personal. Fucking hypocrite.

                    3. You’ve been drinking again I see.

                    4. You denigrate anyone who has ever even entertained the idea that Trump isn’t literal Hitler.

                      I actually don’t. If you actually read what I write, instead of just making sweeping assumptions, while I am very critical of Team Red, but I try very hard not to personally insult individuals around here unless they have been personally insulting to me. Such as Tulpa or JesseAZ.

                      And why are you taking this criticism of Team Red so personally, Mr. JoJo Voter? Hmm?

                    5. You love using sophistry, hyperbole, straw man, etc. If there is a logical fallacy you don’t commonly used, it is one I’ve never heard of. You sound like a freshman poli-sci major. Even when I agree with you, I almost wish I didn’t because you are intellectually stunted and dishonest.

                      *golfclap*

                    6. Dude, an attack on the right is not a personal attack. If you take that as personal, you should question why either (a) you are a conservative hanging out at a libertarian site; or (b) a libertarian who has emotional-level loyalty to conservatism.

                    7. When someone like soldiermedic says “nobody here likes you” it confirms the existence of the Trump mean girls club.

                    8. And calling all conservatives scared and paranoid is a personal attack. It is also intellectually dishonest. Especially when he claims this is unique to only the right. My problem isn’t his criticism of the right so much as his dishonest statement that he is being intellectually honest when he only ever attacks the right but goes out of his way to defend when people point out the exact or worse behavior from the left. I hate intellectually dishonest people. I hate narcissists, smugness and hypocrisy. All of which describe ChemJeff. Hell, sometimes I even agree with his basic thesis but his attitude and hyperbole and hypocrisy pisses me off to the point I have to point it out. Like my disagreement with you about Trump’s tweet. It was fucking stupid, and even more stupid when he doubled down on it (and I am willing to admit your summation of his motives may be correct) by saying he could do it by executive order is just fucking worrying. I don’t hate the left. I don’t ignore them. I go out of my way to read sources from all sides of the spectrum. I challenge my preconceptions whenever I can. I can’t stand Trump because he isnt honest (but no less dishonest in my opinion than most politicians) and a narcissist. I also can’t stand how everyone acts like he is unique and especially when they use dishonest methods such as selective quotes or fabrications. I know a number of Trump voters and can’t stand how you and ChemJeff dehumanize them. Mostly because they are my friends and family and most of them are fairly thoughtful people. I disagree with their votes but no the lefts vitriol and portrayal of them is just hateful and wrong. I attack ChemJeff because he just is a symptom of the tribalism that is destroying civility in this country. And yes, I am probably a bit of a hypocrite myself because I don’t go after those who do the same to the left and progressives with nearly the same vigor, and I will admit that. Because, it is the truth. I won’t try and deny I lean more right, even though I tend to agree with libertainism on many points and it is far better than what either of the other parties offer.

                    9. There are a bunch of things in your comment:

                      “And calling all conservatives scared and paranoid is a personal attack.”

                      I’m not sure that is so. It might be at a dinner party, but we are here to discuss politics. It’s certainly not a personal attack where it is clearly targeted at an individual, and uses off-topic criticisms such as “you are dumb”, “you are fat”.

                      Anyway, I haven’t called all conservatives paranoid and scared (at least today), so I won’t try too hard to defend anyone who did. I believe when I’ve said things like that before I was not criticizing ALL conservatives, but only certain commenters here.

                      “I know a number of Trump voters and can’t stand how you and ChemJeff dehumanize them. Mostly because they are my friends and family and most of them are fairly thoughtful people.”

                      Same here. I don’t believe I do dehumanize them. I complain about specific cliques of Trump supports, right here in this comment section. I started out being polite to them, but pointing out glaring flaws in their arguments. They started being rude to me. Very rude. Repeatedly. When all I was doing was making factual statements.

                    10. White Knight those are ChemJeffs tactics. These are almost exact quotes from his posts. Maybe read what he writes before defending him from “the mean girls” you’ll see that he often calls it upon himself with his smugness and condescending attitude and hypocrisy and partisan tribalism. And than whines and tries to imply he’s being bullied.

                    11. “When someone like soldiermedic says “nobody here likes you” it confirms the existence of the Trump mean girls club.”

                      Most people here are pretty fed up your smug stupidity also.
                      Oh, and you can ram your RDS up your ass so your head has some company.

                    12. RDS? Is that supposed to be Right-Wing Derangement Syndrome? Hadn’t heard that one before. Clever.

                      Would DDS be Democrat Derangement Syndrome? Or a Dentist? What if a dentist has Democrat Derangement Syndrome? Would we refer to the dentist as (DDS)^2?

                    13. I don’t know how long you’ve been around, soldiermedic, but chemjeff used to be consistently polite. Then he got repeatedly personally attacked. Same thing happened to me.

                    14. “I don’t know how long you’ve been around, soldiermedic, but chemjeff used to be consistently polite. Then he got repeatedly personally attacked. Same thing happened to me.”

                      I don’t know how long you’ve been around, and since you’re now posting under a sock, I have no way of judging your claim.
                      Jeff may well have been ‘civil’, but s/he has been mendacious since I’ve recognized the handle; maybe being called on his constant bullshit has caused him to get defensive rather than educated.
                      In your case, there have been many commenters here who are both smug and full of shit, starting with, oh, MNG back in ’05 or so, who also got very nasty when being called on their bullshit.
                      Why are you now hiding? Afraid of your rep for bullshitting?

                    15. I still try to be polite. I really do. It is difficult sometimes. But that is what standards are for. If standards were easy, they they wouldn’t be standards then, just baseline behavior. I’m an imperfect human being, I’m not polite sometimes even when I ought to be, that much is true. I’ve never claimed to be “better” than everyone, or some know-it-all. I offer my opinions, I think that much is evident. I don’t claim that my opinion is The Truth with a Capital T. I present evidence and reasoning for my claims more often than not. And yes sometimes I do get emotional. When peoples’ rights are being stomped upon, I’m not some Vulcan robot that can just shut off my emotions. I get upset when that happens. IMO everyone here OUGHT to get upset when that happens.

                    16. Jeff may well have been ‘civil’, but s/he has been mendacious since I’ve recognized the handle; maybe being called on his constant bullshit has caused him to get defensive rather than educated.

                      You are partially correct, Sevo. I do have pride, I admit it. Who doesn’t? I do get defensive sometimes when I should probably step back and learn more information. You know what would help persuade me to a particular point of view, rather than push me into a corner in a defensive crouch? Presenting persuasive evidence, instead of just insults and ad-homs. What do you think perennially calling me a piece of shit accomplishes? I guess you feel good, but it doesn’t make me any more interested in trying to understand your point of view.

                    17. chemjeff radical individualist
                      August.4.2020 at 10:34 pm
                      “I still try to be polite. I really do…”

                      Sure you do Jeff, as long buys you steaming pile of shit.
                      Unfortunately, it’s rare you don’t post bullshit and, fortunately equally rare you don’t get called on it.
                      So your efforts at ‘civility’ are ruined by your constant mendacity.

                    18. chemjeff radical individualist
                      August.4.2020 at 10:00 pm
                      “RDS? Is that supposed to be Right-Wing Derangement Syndrome? Hadn’t heard that one before. Clever.”

                      Proud of yourself for finding a one-key error in posting? I have no doubt you are; that is the apogee of your ability to engage in honest comment.

                    19. “You know what would help persuade me to a particular point of view, rather than push me into a corner in a defensive crouch? Presenting persuasive evidence, instead of just insults and ad-homs.”

                      You know what would take you off the list of ‘nothing-but-bullshitters’? Read the evidence you’ve been given.
                      You don’t want ‘persuasive’ evidence; you, Tony, trueman and the lot want bullshit which backs up your beliefs.
                      I have a hint; as an old fart, raised in the midwest, then moving to the west coast, and then getting educated, my views on many subjects have changed over time, in response to the evidence I was able to find.
                      You should try that.

                    20. Leftists: so passive aggressive

                      Have some fucking balls, or stop bitching that nobody respects you

                    21. Proud of yourself for finding a one-key error in posting?

                      I didn’t think it was an error. I thought you were being clever, Sevo.

                    22. You know what would take you off the list of ‘nothing-but-bullshitters’? Read the evidence you’ve been given.

                      Okay, such as?

                      And my views on various subjects have changed over time too. I used to be a pretty doctrinaire Republican believe it or not. I wised up from that though.

                    23. “I didn’t think it was an error. I thought you were being clever, Sevo.”

                      No comment and none required.

                    24. I was genuinely not trying to make fun of a typo. I genuinely thought you cleverly came up with a new term.

                    25. “Okay, such as?”

                      Just about every call on your bullshit. Look upthread; I called you on that strawman and then poisoning the well, and I’m sure you thought that was a clever response.
                      I’m guessing you really aren’t bright enough to understand that your bullshit will be called; like Tony’s lies, it’s not really cleverly disguised and you simply aren’t smart enough to understand it IS bullshit. You BELIEVE your own bullshit.
                      Fuck you and your supposed ‘innocence’; you are called on your bullshit regularly.
                      You and White Knight should have a soothing dinner together; neither one of you accepts that your rejection is a rejection of bullshit.

                  2. Since I detest Trump almost as much as I detest intellectually dishonest ChemJeff and you, for much the same reason, I doubt I belong to any Trump Mean Girls club. As for ChemJeff not using personal attacks he calls me bitchy, trumpers, trumpbots. He just stated that all on the right should be ignored. That all conservatives are scared and paranoid. He does use as hominems against many other posters on here, even though he denies he does. When I have actually quoted him he has moved the goal posts and claimed it was pre-emptive because they insulted him in the past. And he cries whenever anyone turns the tables on him. He states he criticizes the left but I’ve never seen him to do it even once. He claims Republicans are racist but than makes excuses for Biden’s racist remarks. Yes. He is quickly pissing everyone off, hell even Brandy Buck, who hates Trump, and Cyto, hardly a Trump supporter told him off yesterday for exactly the same thing I just posted about him. And you are almost just as fucking bad, though you do criticize the left more often than he does, but than again once is always going to be greater than never. So it is a fairly low bar to cross.

                    1. You are the one being dishonest here, soldiermedic. Let me illustrate it for you.

                      he calls me bitchy

                      I did not. I said you were bitching. Which you were.

                      He just stated that all on the right should be ignored.

                      I did not. Here is what I said:
                      “For the record, I don’t think conservatives should be shot or gassed. I just don’t think they ought to be listened to very much when it comes to issues of liberty.”

                      That is not the same as saying “all on the right should be ignored”.

                      That all conservatives are scared and paranoid.

                      No I didn’t. This is what I said:
                      “Team Red is in the grips of a cult of personality fueled by paranoia and fear.”
                      Quite a bit different.

                      He does use as hominems against many other posters on here, even though he denies he does.

                      I have never claimed that I *never* used ad hominems, just that I try very hard not to use them against people who haven’t used them against me first. People like Tulpa and JesseAZ. I am sure that I have not been perfect in this regards, but I do try in any event.

                      When I have actually quoted him he has moved the goal posts and claimed it was pre-emptive because they insulted him in the past.

                      I have never attempted to justify ad hominem attacks as some sort of “pre-emptive” strategy. Where do you get this?

                      He states he criticizes the left but I’ve never seen him to do it even once.

                      I did it in this very discussion:

                      “And by the way, I don’t even deny that Democrats have had their fair share of sketchy voting practices, up to and including voter fraud.”

                      He claims Republicans are racist

                      No, I don’t.

                      but than makes excuses for Biden’s racist remarks.

                      I’m pretty sure I didn’t do this, either.

                      hell even Brandy Buck, who hates Trump, and Cyto, hardly a Trump supporter told him off yesterday for exactly the same thing I just posted about him.

                      I did not see any post from Brandybuck yesterday that referenced me in any way. Could you cite where you claimed to have seen this?

                      That’s a lot of lies that you told about me, soldiermedic. Why do you do this?

                    2. Sophistry. All your counterarguments are just sophistry. Stating I’m bitching is not any different than calling me bitchy. Stating they should be ignored on personal liberties is basically stating they should be ignored. Because you disagree with them. Stating they have nothing but fear and paranoia is exactly the same thing as stating they are all scared and paranoid. Sorry, but you attempts at sophistry is just sad.

                    3. And I haven’t told a single lie. I’ve told you exactly what I think of you. And stating someone is brainwashed or buys into FNC or Breitbart is a personal insult, it implies they are either weak minded, stupid or both. And your condescending insult that “you’re to smart” is backhanded compliment e.g. an insult. You just think we don’t realize it for what it is. I haven’t lied about anything. You just hate having their mirror held up to you.

                    4. When we were discussing Biden’s remark you actually cited an opinion piece and stated this gives a good explanation of Biden’s in chain comments. Yes you did. And as for JesseAz, I admit he does this as well and doesn’t even try to hide it. Unlike you. And you use insults all the time. What else would you describe “your just buying the Breitbart/FNC talking points and you’re smarter than that (and no today is not the first time you’ve told me that or used that against others). And as for Brandy buck do your own fucking research.

                    5. Stating I’m bitching is not any different than calling me bitchy.

                      No, it is different. “Bitching” is an activity. Being “bitchy” is a character trait. You were “bitching”, i.e., complaining. I don’t think you are a “bitchy” person, i.e., possessing that particular character trait. Please read what I wrote and not what you thought I wrote.

                      Stating they should be ignored on personal liberties is basically stating they should be ignored.

                      No, it is not. I meant what I wrote, not what you thought I “basically” wrote.

                      Stating they have nothing but fear and paranoia is exactly the same thing as stating they are all scared and paranoid.

                      Again, I wrote:
                      “Team Red is in the grips of a cult of personality fueled by paranoia and fear.”

                      By “Team Red” I mean the Republican movement as a whole, not each individual member. And yes I do think the Team Red agenda does involve a heavy dose of demagoguery and paranoia. I can see how my words could have been misconstrued however so I should have chosen them more carefully.

                      When we were discussing Biden’s remark you actually cited an opinion piece and stated this gives a good explanation of Biden’s in chain comments. Yes you did.

                      Oh I remember now, I cited this piece:

                      https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/joe-biden-put-yall-back-in-chains/

                      It was not an opinion piece, it was a Snopes fact-checking piece. And it put his remarks into context. A lot of the context was not flattering towards Biden. You should read the article. It has quotes like this:

                      “Was he talking about slavery? You bet your a** he was. Was he using the vernacular? Yes, he was,” said Rangel, a longtime New York Democrat who is a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus. “Did he think it was cute … Yes, he did. Was it something stupid to say? You bet your life it was stupid.”

                      So it included quotes from other Democrats piling on to Biden for his stupid remark. Did you read the article?

                      And as for Brandy buck do your own fucking research.

                      Well I did – I could not find any post from him/her yesterday in which he/she referenced me at all. So I genuinely don’t know what you are talking about.

                      And I haven’t told a single lie.

                      Oh yes you did. You wrote:

                      He states he criticizes the left but I’ve never seen him to do it even once.

                      and I even pointed out that *in this very discussion*, I correctly accused Democrats of having engaged in voter fraud. Is this not critical enough for you?

                      Look I’m not a perfect human being but you need to stop the rage posting for a moment and look at what you are actually writing.

                    6. Stop your rage posting.. this kind of smug, I’m better than you and above you attitude is what pisses people off about you. Also,I don’t consider a statement that Democrats are bad and then you spend three paragraphs outlining how the Republicans are worse is true criticism. And rather you realize it or not your snope article doesn’t call Biden’s statement what it was, racist and fear mongering. And also, Biden’s comment on Charlemagne da God’s show was equally, if not more racist. This is another tactic you use, you take a single example and try to disprove it while ignoring all the other evidence people have presented. And maybe reflect that if several people are telling you something about your behavior maybe they, not you, are the correct ones. Also, if you think CNN and Vox are center left that explains it all.

                    7. By all means, then, continue your rage posting and get even more unhinged. It doesn’t affect *my* blood pressure.

                      Also,I don’t consider a statement that Democrats are bad and then you spend three paragraphs outlining how the Republicans are worse is true criticism.

                      Oh so you’ve moved the goalposts from “never criticized Democrats” to “not criticized Democrats enough”. Look, I criticized them, you lied when you claimed I never did, just admit you were wrong.

                      And rather you realize it or not your snope article doesn’t call Biden’s statement what it was, racist and fear mongering.

                      Maybe that’s because it wasn’t an opinion piece, but a Snopes fact-checking piece, as I said it was.

                      As far as I’m concerned, it was definitely a demagogic appeal, and for that alone it deserves to be criticized, but I don’t know if I would say it was racist per se.

                      And yes I think his comment on Charlemagne’s show was pretty awful.

                      Also, if you think CNN and Vox are center left that explains it all.

                      Then what are they? “Far left”? Then what is Slate or Jacobin?

                      CNN and Vox and similar institutions basically represent the Hillary Clinton/Joe Biden wing of center-left neoliberal politics.

                  3. White Knight those are ChemJeffs tactics. These are almost exact quotes from his posts. Maybe read what he writes before defending him from “the mean girls” you’ll see that he often calls it upon himself with his smugness and condescending attitude and hypocrisy and partisan tribalism. And than whines and tries to imply he’s being bullied.

                    1. I’ve been here a long time. The commentariat used to be a place where people had real conversations. I saw the Trump mean girls start hanging up on people and using personal attacks all the time. chemjeff shouldn’t be rude, but he didn’t start it.

                    2. The White Knight
                      August.4.2020 at 10:28 pm
                      “I’ve been here a long time. The commentariat used to be a place where people had real conversations….”

                      Your claim might have some cred if you hadn’t chosen to adopt a sock or simply lie.
                      Bullshitters tend to be the target of those who are tired of reading bullshit.

                    3. To the extent there are “mean girls” maybe y’all shouldn’t have spent the better part of 4 years calling anyone who disagreed with you on immigration or tariffs (or who dared to acknowledge when they thought Trump did something right, or who dared to point out the glaring bullshit of the media/narrative) things like Trumpistas and Trumpalos? Just a thought.

                    4. How about if the right-leaning folks around here didn’t call everyone who deviated from right-wing orthodoxy a “progtard” or “leftist scum” or some such?

                      Why do I have to walk on eggshells to protect your fragile ego but you get to run a bulldozer over everyone else’s?

                3. Like the paranoid delusions of “plague lines”?

              2. The election will take place mostly by mail this time for obvious reasons. Do you want it to be a credible and secure election or not?

                1. Not in my state, and not in 27 states. Is Oklahoma going full mail in? I find that hard to believe.

                  1. No but most people will be availing themselves of the option.

                    1. Requesting is different than the state just mailing them out without request. I have no problem with people requesting them, Montana is doing the same, but I am not in favor of just mailing them out without a request. Also, I could actually care less. I do find it dishonest to pretend voter fraud is not a problem and mass mail in ballots are problematic, but I also am not overly concerned one way or the other.

              3. I am a libertarian, but a pragmatic one. Making sure the United States Post Office is capable of supporting vital governmental functions like handling mail-in ballots correctly, that’s citizen money well spent.

                1. “I am a libertarian, but a pragmatic one.”

                  Yeah, you’re also, according to YOUR claims, posting under a sock, so forgive me for assuming bullshitting is pretty much a habit with you.

              4. You are going off on chemjeff because he agreed that we need to be constructive about making sure we have honest elections?

                1. “You are going off on chemjeff because he agreed that we need to be constructive about making sure we have honest elections?”

                  Not sure which bullshitter-under-a formal-handle you are, but do you think that stinking pile of shit is going to get saluted?

  20. For your edification:
    “Willie Brown: Why Democrats own the GOP in mail voting”
    […]
    “…“Harvesting” votes can be also be effective — that’s where the campaign actually delivers absentee ballots for people — but you have to be careful. It’s legal in California but not in all states, and even in California, you can get in trouble.
    Lee’s people got into hot water in his first election when they set up a booth at a Chinatown street fair and helped fill out and collect absentee ballots for elderly Chinese-speaking voters…”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/williesworld/article/Willie-Brown-Why-Democrats-own-the-GOP-in-mail-15450612.php?cmpid=gsa-sfgate-result

    Gee, need help with that ballot? I know how you want to vote, just sign the bottom there…

  21. Why not just mandate that everyone download the Mayor Pete/Secretary Clinton voting app onto their phone(s) (like the one they used in the Dem caucuses in Iowa), and we can have instant results on Election Night, with no voter fraud?

  22. Everyone needs to be clear on one point so we know what we’re arguing about: Republican hysteria about voting fraud is and has always been a pretext they invented out of thin air to justify their own legal impediments to voting. There is nothing more going on than that. It’s the same tactic they always use to make people give them the unearned power they want: make them afraid of something that isn’t real.

    1. I assume you really can’t read:
      “…“Harvesting” votes can be also be effective — that’s where the campaign actually delivers absentee ballots for people — but you have to be careful. It’s legal in California but not in all states, and even in California, you can get in trouble.
      Lee’s people got into hot water in his first election when they set up a booth at a Chinatown street fair and helped fill out and collect absentee ballots for elderly Chinese-speaking voters…”
      https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/williesworld/article/Willie-Brown-Why-Democrats-own-the-GOP-in-mail-15450612.php?cmpid=gsa-sfgate-result

      There is fraud staring you in the face, and as an average leefty fucking ignoramus, you seem to miss it.

      1. Donald Trump is actively picking and choosing which states he wants to ban mail voting in depending on how the demographics and polling affects his chances.

        He wants to ban mail voting in Nevada but expand it in Florida where old people who vote for Republicans by mail live.

      2. So you caught Willie Brown confessing to felony election fraud… in a newspaper op-ed. Holy shit Miss Marple, how do you do it?

        You quoted a passage where he’s discussing how laws for getting out the vote differ by state, and how you have to make sure to follow the law. It’s literally the opposite of what you think it is and oh my god why do I bother.

        1. You stupid shit, read this:

          “…when they set up a booth at a Chinatown street fair and helped fill out and collect absentee ballots for elderly Chinese-speaking voters…”

          The D “harvesters” were ‘helping fill out the ballots!
          If that isn’t fraud, it’ll suffice until something better comes along.

          1. Yes, whatever he means by that, he is describing a scenario in which the organizers got into months of legal trouble over that (charges eventually dismissed). It’s right there in the next sentence.

            I expect the politicians serving my interests to get right up to the legal line when it comes to GOTV. Just like Republicans do, though far more ruthlessly.

    2. Everyone needs to be clear on one point so we know what we’re arguing about: Republican hysteria about voting fraud is and has always been a pretext they invented out of thin air to justify their own legal impediments to voting.

      Requiring healthy adults to vote in person and identify themselves before voting is the norm among all other free nations and democracies.

      The question isn’t why Republicans want this, the question is why Democrats are so opposed to it.

      1. Why don’t you explain why it’s good to make voting harder than it needs to be.

  23. Okay, this is hilarious.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpIkl2QnJeI

    Warning for crude language, probably NSFW

    1. Could have been funnier 1/10.

      Also, was Trump supposed to go full autocratic authoritarian and unilaterally stop travel from outside the US, inside the US, and force everyone to wear a mask?

  24. Why don’t we just let Google and Facebook collaborate on an algorithm to determine the winner, and skip the expense of the election? We can send the savings to a charity for old programmers.

  25. I am surprised the Times published a story that undermined the narrative.

  26. Trump’s Warnings About Voting by MailReason Writers Mix Reasonable Concerns With Fanciful Conspiracy Theories

  27. Start making cash online work easily from home.i have received a paycheck of $24K in this month by working online from home.i am a student and i just doing this job in my spare HERE? Read More

  28. Democrats are still whining about the 2000 election when it came down to just a thousand votes in Florida. They attempted to flip the election in about 5 Democrat counties where they wanted ballots counted that had Bush scratched out and Gore wrote in and to throw out ballots that had been punched for Bush but there was still a piece of the paper hanging (hanging chads).
    In 2018 Broward County, one of the counties that has problems every election, was found to have poll workers in private offices with no supervision “correcting” Democrat ballots that had mistakes. Over 2000 ballots that were rejected for improper social security numbers, birth dates and signatures on the envelopes were lost. The envelopes were still there but empty and the presumption was they had been mixed in with valid ballots. Half of Broward County’s election precincts reported more ballots cast than the number of voters. That one county caused a recount for the Senate seat and the Governor race after both Republicans won on election night. All of this occurred with mailed in provisional ballots. A judge was forced to stop them counting “found” ballots days after all other precincts had finished.

  29. Thanks admin for giving such valuable information through your article . Your article is much more similar to https://adc.bocsci.com/services/antibody-modification-and-conjugation-technologies.html word unscramble tool because it also provides a lot of knowledge of vocabulary new words with its meanings.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.