Election 2020

Don't Buy Trump's Conspiracy Theories About Ballots Being Dumped in Rivers

There are many unique challenges facing election officials this year, but widespread malfeasance isn't one of them.


Near the tail end of last week's chaotic debate, President Donald Trump once again raised the specter of widespread election malfeasance.

This has become somewhat routine for Trump, who warned throughout the spring and summer that expanded mail-in voting—an arrangement made necessary by the COVID-19 pandemic—would become a tool for fraudsters. Lately, however, he's turned to suggesting not only that the absentee ballots are vulnerable to fraud but that election officials running the system are part of the supposed scheme. That was the point that Trump drove at on Tuesday night.

"Take a look at West Virginia. Mailmen selling the ballots," he said. "They are being dumped in rivers. This is a horrible thing for our country."

Factually, the president was conflating and exaggerating two different events. In West Virginia, a mailman was convicted earlier this year of altering a handful of absentee ballot applications. Here's the rub: He was caught changing them from Democrat to Republican.

The claim that ballots were found "in rivers"—later Trump also talked about ballots being dumped "in a ditch"—is a little more difficult to nail down. When asked about it on Wednesday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany declined to provide additional information to support the president's claim. There were three trays of mail found in a ditch in rural Wisconsin last week, which may be what Trump was alluding to. But Wisconsin election officials told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that no absentee ballots were found there.

Trump's exaggerated claims only go so far on their own. Behind the scenes, the Trump campaign and the Republican Party are helping sow the seeds of chaos. In North Carolina, for example, the Trump campaign has written directly to county election officials to ask them to disregard the state's own rules for handling some mail-in ballots, the Associated Press reports. It's a blatant attempt at politicizing one of the most fundamentally objective aspects of democracy: counting votes.

The Trump campaign argues that it is merely trying to ensure a fair election, but the rhetorical and legal attacks on voting suggest otherwise. Trump appears to be laying out a rationale to challenge the results of the election after it's finished, not merely to ensure it is conducted correctly.

The absence of a national conspiracy to rob Republicans of the election does not change the fact that the widespread use of absentee ballots due to COVID-19 is creating some very real challenges for state and local election officials.

In many ways, the mail-in ballot process is actually more secure against the type of fraud that Trump is worried about—ballot boxes being "stuffed" or Republican votes being discarded in rivers en masse—because there is a paper trail for every ballot. That's how we know, for example, that one North Carolina county has been rejecting an abnormally high number of mail-in ballots. Being able to detect those outliers is the first step toward preventing abuse. Rather than being evidence of fraud, those reports actually prove that the system is working as intended.

The real worry is that counting millions of votes cast by mail will simply take a lot longer. That's especially true in some key states—including Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin—where election officials are not allowed to begin opening and counting mailed-in ballots until Election Day itself. There will likely be thousands of votes that remain uncounted until days or even weeks after the election, and that period of uncertainty is potentially made worse by a president who thrives in chaos.

Luckily, most voters seem to have received the message that we may not have a president-elect on Election Day. A Politico/Morning Consult poll published last week found that just 20 percent of voters believe a winner will be declared on November 3, while 66 percent say they expect it to happen later—though most of that group believe the election will take only a few days to resolve. Only 21 percent of voters believe the race will remain unresolved for a week or more.

In the same poll, an outright majority of voters (53 percent) said they were "concerned" about Trump "prematurely declaring victory." Only 33 percent said they were worried Biden would do the same.

If there is a dispute over who won, of course, it will become all the more important that the election system itself is regarded as trustworthy, so Trump's attacks on its legitimacy matter—and the hardball tactics Republicans are using to generate more confusion surrounding Election Day aren't helping.

NEXT: John McAfee Arrested in Spain, Indicted on U.S. Tax Charges

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. Shut up he explained.

    1. Some people did some things.

      1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

        Here’s what I do…>> Click here

    2. I quit working at shop rite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me job happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

      Here’s what I do…>>Visit Here

    3. I quit working at shop rite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me jot happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

      Here’s what I do…>>Visit Here

    4. Google paid for all online work from home from $ 16,000 to $ 32,000 a month. The younger brother was out of Abr work for three months and a month ago her check was $ 32475, working at home for 4 hours a day, and earning could be even bigger….So I started......Visit Here

  2. If there's one thing I've learned in the past 3+ years is don't buy no conspiracy theories.

    1. Actually I learned this through out much of my 60+ years. They are always out there, it just that Trump champions as few.

      1. 60+ years

        A boomer. That explains a lot.

        1. Pretty sure that's 60-going-on-15.

        2. What does it explain? What is it you know more than him?

  3. Voter fraud mostly never happens.

      1. Lol, John Oliver.
        What, you couldn't find a "debunking" video by someone a little more impartial, like say, Tom Perez or Chuck Schumer?


      2. Is that where you get yours news. Says a lot.


        Even had a fucking election overturned due to fraud this year fucktard.

      3. Except, why are democrats the only ones afraid to vote in person? They wouldn’t be turning a blind eye to whatever that hag pelosi has up her sleeve?

    1. And mostly peacefully.

    2. it'll be a mostly honest election

    3. 90% of the votes will be mostly legitimate.

  4. Boehm....Are you normally this stupid, or do you have to work extra hard at it? Are you FKM?

    Thousands of ballots tossed in NY, but nah....nothing to see here.
    Thousands of ballots tossed in NJ, and people now being prosecuted for vote fraud, but nah....nothing to see here.
    Thousands of ballots tossed in WI, but nah...nothing to see here.

    You are either blind, or the dumbest motherfucking journo-list that has ever lived. You have truly outdone yourself with this dreck that you call an article.

    1. NY and NJ don't matter. They are going for Biden anyway. Do you have a link to the Wisconsin story?

      1. Oh. Biden voting states don't care about fraud. Got it.

        1. Thousands of ballots. "doesn't matter"

          1. If you see one cockroach...

            Gotta love it when with every instance, here come the Dems to say it's the only one and it isn't widespread.

            Of course the question that can't be answered is that if you make it illegal to look for fraud [can't require an ID], just how is it that it would be seen if it was there? Democrats can't find voter fraud for the same reason a thief can't find a cop.

    2. Just like Hunter Biden's $3.5 million donation from the mayor of Moscow, that's been debunked. Now stop asking questions about it and get your head back in the sand.

      1. It was from the late mayor's wife. And, no, it hasn't been "debunked".

        God, people, stop using "debunked" as a synonym for "disputed"! Some moron saying, "no, it didn't happen", or "I haven't seen the evidence, (Because I refused to look.)" doesn't "debunk" something.

        1. I believe CS was speaking sarcastically

    3. sure, a few isolated examples
      anecdotes aren't evidence

      1. Actually, anecdotes are evidence in an existence argument.

      2. It isnt a few. Many AGs don't even investigate. Jay walking also never happens since cops generally don't ticket it.

        What idiocy.

        1. As progressives are generally idiots.

    4. This electio is going to be an epic shitshow. Bohem wants to make sure we all know in advance that it will be entirely Trump's fault.

  5. >>but widespread malfeasance isn't one of them.

    must be pretty fucking certain to put it in the header sentence.

    1. How does a reporter speak in absolutes when there is already plentiful evidence against it?

      I think I respect “reporters” less than politicians.

      1. They write these stories because there will be massive vote fraud, and they know it.
        It's pure bolshevik psychological manipulation.

        1. You say that with the same faith that progressives have in climate change and income inequality being terrible threats to the world. Who needs evidence? You feel it's true, so it must be.

          1. Except there are no liberals on record saying climate change is a hoax, while there are plenty of Republican officials on record, including Donald Trump repeatedly, saying that they have to suppress the vote in order to win.

            1. Ok.

              Name one.

              And please provide an exact quote.

              1. “The things they had in there were crazy,” Trump said. “They had things — levels of voting that, if you ever agreed to it, you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again.”

                "Traditionally it's always been Republicans suppressing votes in places," Clark told the group, which included Wisconsin State Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald and the executive director of the state's Republican party.

                "Let's start protecting our voters," he continued, partly referring to Election Day monitoring of polling places. "We know where they are [...] Let's start playing offense a little bit. That's what you're going to see in 2020. It's going to be a much bigger program, a much more aggressive program, a much better-funded program."

                1. That's Trump followed by Trump election adviser explaining how Republicans have traditionally relied on suppressing votes to win, and now they should also focus on intimidating voters at the polls.

                  1. Everything is so terrible and unfair.

                2. "Clark told the AP that his point was "Republicans have historically been falsely accused of voter suppression and that it is time we stood up to defend our own voters." He said he did not condone anyone's vote being "diluted" and that "our efforts will be focused on preventing just that."


                  You are lying, Tony.

                  1. Well, duh!

                  2. He means correctly accused.

                    1. How come you always think we won't check up on you?
                      You pull the same stunt over and over and over again.

                    2. Because it brings a metric fuckton of comments to this site, Mother's. It's what he's always done.

                      I've no idea why you all engage with the dishonest piece of crap.

                  3. Of course he was lying. He's a liar, it's what he does.

                    1. If there isn't a lie somewhere in his post, it's not shitstain.

            2. Saying there are no liberals who dispute climate change is like saying there are no Christians who dispute the resurrection.

              1. There is nothing to dispute.

                1. That isn't how science works.

                  1. Science is about skepticism. That doesn't mean the dispute is right just declaring that there is nothing to dispute isn't science it's faith. Disputing the models can either strengthen them or discount them but denying the dispute doesn't do anything but move the debate from science into the real of theology.

                    1. Good point.

                      But I think "Tony" is a bot.

                    2. There is a level of skepticism that is reasonable, and there's a level of skepticism that is insane. Here is an example. Questioning random genetic mutation as the driving force behind variation leading to natural selection is healthy skepticism. Questioning evolution is insanity. The level of skepticism expressed by conservatives over climate change is closer to the insanity end of the scale.

                    3. What he said. You’re not a skeptic, you’re a dogmatic believer in lies.

                    4. No, that's you, Tony.

                    5. Oh great. First chipper tries to teach comedy. And now he tries to teach science. Dumb at both.

                      You literally confuse climate warming with climate alarmist idiocy. 1800s were a cold point, of course it would warm after a cold point, just lie after the LIA and MWP. It is up to you to prove the warming us abnormal. Outside of climate models abd hockey sticks it isnt. Tree lines still being uncovered by retreating glaciers as an example.

                      Don't mix your historical and scientific ignorance with fact.

                    6. "The level of skepticism expressed by conservatives over climate change is closer to the insanity end of the scale."

                      The level of gullibility by those on the lefty falls far on the insanity level of the scale.
                      Not ONE single prediction has proven true. Note that this is after some 30 years of predictions, and I repeat, not ONE,

              2. it would be difficult to find anyone who disputes climate change.
                the real questions are how much does humanity affect it, and how much will it cost to try to change that, and will it even work?

                1. How much humanity affects it is also not terribly much in dispute in the scientific community. They have ways to study this question. Get your icky anti-science propaganda away.

                  You don’t want to have a discussion on mitigation policy because you know it would inevitably hurt the bottom line of the interest who subsidize your political philosophy and your favored politicians. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the real one.

                  1. Okay Tony, let's unpack this.

                    Show me a survey of the worlds climatologists where a majority agree with the proposition that climate change is exclusively anthropogenic. Not some vague claim in an article either, but an actual poll.

                    1. That doesn't matter, science is NOT decided by consensus.

                    2. Thats not what Tony's argument was about deet.

                  2. What "interest" would that be, and only one? Spell it out.

                    I'm not a Republican or Democrat, but Republicans, for all their obvious and glaring faults, are focused primarily on this country and what happens in and to it. Democrats, the leadership at least, have their hearts set on a globalist oligarchy not subject to national interests, respect for individual rights, or elections and the other quaint mechanisms of democracy. This is why they don't care what they do to this country or the people in it to grab power, they consider the Constitution null and void, and they would think nothing of stealing an election. They also don't care about climate change, or "the science," or black lives, or ending any sort of systemic injustice, real or imagined. That's what you don't get. That's how they get the serfs to vote their way until they don't need the serfs.

          2. You post with the same reflexive ignorance you usually do.
            There is plenty of evidence of fraud already - evidence you dismiss because it's inconvenient to your faith. There's a history of leftist fraud going back decades.
            Ds have been fighting even the slightest measures to assure vote integrity, such as photo ID and cleaning up voter registration rolls.
            There were the Black Panthers intimidating voters in Philly in 2008, easily provable cases against them dropped. There was the 2016 primary rigging, confirmed via leaked emails.
            There is 2020, covid lockdowns and riots, and the introduction of massive mail out ballots instituted mere months before the election.
            There is their unwillingness to run on their actual policy plans, and reliance on courts to impose legislation they can't otherwise pass.
            There is the bullshit polling, and the coordinated messaging of all major media (including this very article).
            There is their indiscriminate voter registration push, in conjunction with transnational corporation, to inflate the already poorly tracked rolls.
            And there is their own messaging that Trump will win on election day, only to have a flood of ballots come in later.
            Is your hatred of me/us and Trump so blinding that you don't care that no shit totalitarians, who plan on imposing the green new deal and speak of "racism" as a public health crisis, are going to seize power?
            Oh, "but it can't happen here" - I'm sure that'll be a comforting thought when they come for you.

            1. Hey dipshit. evidence that I'm a leftist. He was stupid enough to point out something that allowed me to trounce socialism. Maybe you can do better. I doubt it.

              1. Bitch's Bitching is the He.

              2. Squirrels destroyed that post. Whatever.

                Keep enjoying Alex Jones, dude. Not my bag.

              3. Nardz is best ignored, sarcasmic. Also, good luck getting any of the Trump cultists to see you as anything but a leftist, if you criticize their orange totem-god. You are engaging their lizard brain, and the lizard brain only sees friend and foe. It doesn't have room for more categories.

                1. Eunuch, you'll continue to receive no respect because you're pathetically desperate and not all that intelligent.
                  You can regurgitate leftist shibboleth in the hopes that they'll approve of you, but that's about it.
                  You have no value.

              4. Hey dipshit, I didn't call you a leftist.

            2. There is evidence of voter fraud. It's almost always Republicans doing it: https://lasvegassun.com/news/2020/jul/16/cries-of-voter-fraud-should-be-aimed-at-those-comm/.

              When they're caught committing a crime, that's evidence of the system working. I agree that we should do everything necessary to catch these Republican in-person vote fraudsters.

              And then we should send anyone doing mass voter suppression in response to a nonexistent widespread problem to The Hague, but that's just my opinion.

              1. "The Attorney General has charged four individuals in Paterson, NJ—including one sitting city council member and one candidate for city council who nominally won his race—on charges arising from a scheme to collect and illegally mail in hundreds of absentee ballots in that election. That scheme led to a crisis in Paterson, requiring that the city hold another election between the indicted candidate and his opponent because it is impossible to determine just how many fraudulent ballots were cast," the Trump campaign and Republican Party wrote challenging New Jersey leaders.


                1. So Tony got busted for lying AGAIN?
                  Imagine my................

                2. I don’t care about debating progtard traitors like Tony. Instead we should focus on destroying them. They are the enemy and they won’t change.

                  They have to go for the rest of us to be free.

              2. If they're not caught, then it doesn't exist and never happened.

                If they are caught, then it means we don't need to do anything to make the vote secure and prevent fraud, because those are the only instances and it never happens otherwise.

      2. cite?

        I've seen isolated half dozen ballots here and there, but widespread? I don't think so. Know anyone who works at the polls? They're almost religious about counting votes, regardless of if they agree with the outcome or not.

        So where is this plentiful evidence.

        1. Yes. I know someone who worked the polls as an election judge in Chicago. She told me someone unloaded a van full of Mexican men. Most couldn't speak English. They presented their credentials which consisted of a mailed form from the Clerk of Cook County's office. They all had Polish names. She did not allow them a ballot and was never asked back. The van presumably drove off to the next polling location. Now I didn't witness this in person, but I never saw Charlie Manson kill anyone either.

          1. How do you think this worked? How would presenting a list of polish names result in people getting to vote at a precinct or- if denied- allow them to go to another precinct to vote?

            Do you know how precincts handle voting?

            1. Duh, They have cards with different names and addresses . Did you miss the part that said "Cook County"?

            2. My mother has been dead 20 years, my father six. They are still on the voter rolls in Cook county.

          2. they followed her around in Target after that, or was it Goodwill?

          3. Actually Charles Manson didn't personally kill anyone.

        2. For fucks sake. Do you know how to fucking Google shit? No wonder you're so pathetic.


      3. i guess you are expected to read the article by 'gaslight'...
        just like in olden times 😉

      4. lets try this again... i dont know why its so hard to post late to a comment and actually target the correct comment...

        i guess you are expected to read the article by ‘gaslight’…
        just like in olden times ????

        1. yeesh! i give up!... i cant even tell which comment i'm replying to .

          i blame the squirrels - seems to work for others here.

    2. Nope, vote tampering and widespread malfeasance cannot happen in the US. Nor can a political party spy on the campaign of its political adversary, or pin a hoax conspiracy about alleged foreign collusion on the incoming president. These sort of things happen in uncivilized countries, not in the US!

      1. A hoax that was proposed by the incumbent party's campaign, planned by the director of the CIA in consultation with the head of the FBI, approved by the President, and coordinated with his chief of staff.
        Totalitarian shit right there.

  6. The absence of a national conspiracy to rob Republicans of the election

    Unless you count every major media outlet.

  7. When dealing with issues involving the government, malfeasance isn't needed as an explanation for the complete cock-up you see. Inertia, back-scratching, and general incompetence are all that are needed.

  8. "There are many unique challenges facing election officials this year, but widespread malfeasance isn't one of them."

    Somebody posted a Bee article the other day with a parody of a journalist reporting something that hadn't happened yet--as if it were a forgone conclusion and had already happened.

    This article is like that.

    Stuffing the ballot box is a great American tradition, and the huge number of mail-in ballots makes it easier this election than before.

    If there's no need for Binion to wait for the "malfeasance" NOT to happen before he reports that it won't happen, why's he holding back on predicting lottery numbers?

    1. Binion is just a fucking stupid as Boehm.

      1. The primary concern here certainly seems to be about legitimizing Biden's victory.

        1. Since Biden is estimated to have an 80% chance of winning, what's being done if things go the other way? Or is a Trump win, despite the odds, taken as a default to you?

          1. Are you disagreeing with the observation that the primary concern in this article seems to be about legitimizing Biden's victory? Do you see some other concern being addressed here?

            What are you talking about, and what does it have to do with what I said?

            1. Biden is not the one saying every day that he plans to question the legitimacy of the election if he loses fairly.

              1. Because you think it's a good thing that Boehm's only apparent motive here is to legitimize a Biden victory doesn't mean that Boehm's only apparent motive here isn't to legitimize a Biden victory.

                1. Sounds like your butt hurts because someone criticized Trump.

                  1. Did you see the article they posted over the weekend titled, "The Libertarian Case for Biden"?

                    There wasn't one, and I suspect the reason is because there isn't a libertarian case for voting for Biden.

                    Trump's platform and record may be thoroughly flawed from a libertarian capitalist perspective, but Biden's platform is thoroughly authoritarian and socialist. The best libertarian case for Trump may be that Biden being elected will be a devastating blow to libertarian capitalism. And yet here's an ostensibly libertarian capitalist website that asks for donations from libertarian capitalists so that they can preach the libertarian capitalist gospel--writing articles in which the only apparent objective is to legitimize a Biden win?!

                    It's noteworthy.

                    1. Thanks for acknowledging that libertarians are among the 25% still remaining on the Trump train to hell. You’re doing my work for me.

                      I still haven’t gotten anyone to explain exactly how Trump is libertarian in any way. But these are people who seem confused about whether fascism is the same thing as liberty, so what you gonna do.

                    2. >> isn’t a libertarian case for voting for Biden.

                      barely a *democrat* case for voting B

              2. Trump is not saying this either.

                1. Seriously dude?

                  1. Seriously. Dude.

                  2. "Seriously dude?"

                    Yes, you lying pile of lefty shit.

              3. No. Thats Hillary, Facebook, and other democrats. Likewise 30 years of cries of voter suppression.

                1. Nuh uh. That doesn't count! We have endless stories from Party...I mean mainstream new sources saying that voter fraud never happens, but when it does it's Republicans doing it. But they also say there's constantly hooded klansmen at every polling place on the South side of Chicago!

              4. "Biden is not the one saying every day that he plans to question the legitimacy of the election if he loses fairly."

                Nor has Trump, you lying pile of lefty shit.

              5. Neither is Trump, you dolt.

                You see that last word in your comment? That's the important part...

              6. No, just all the other democrats, like Hillary and Pelosi.

          2. >>80% chance of winning

            thank you. I'm all sad over here about Eddie Van Halen and you totally made me larf

      2. "Binion is just a fucking stupid as Boehm."

        In a few weeks here, they're gonna start asking us for donations.

        1. I know. That would be extreme chutzpah, considering how progressive and un-Libertarian they are.

    2. "A former U.S. Congressman was charged Tuesday in an indictment unsealed today, with conspiring to violate voting rights by fraudulently stuffing the ballot boxes for specific candidates in the 2014, 2015, and 2016 primary elections, bribery of an election official, falsification of records, voting more than once in federal elections, and obstruction of justice."

      ----Department of Justice, July 23, 2020


    3. How should we sanction Republican politicians for their very clear attempts to defraud the election by suppressing the franchise?

      They're the only ones actually doing any of this, so I'm curious what you think should be done about them.

      1. "How should we sanction Republican politicians for their very clear attempts to defraud the election by suppressing the franchise?"

        Is Tony using a random generator for comments, or is this supposed to be related to what I wrote in some way I don't understand?

        1. Do you think it's valid to suppress hundreds of thousands of votes to "fix" an in-person voter fraud problem that simply does not exist?

          1. And you know it doesn't exist because there isn't any evidence that they aren't looking for. You can always tell that something isn't happening just by not looking for it.

            1. Lawyers trying to suppress the vote in Montana were forced to admit in court that there wasn’t a single case of voter fraud in 20 years. It’s a sham and furthermore an obvious one.

              1. It isn’t. You democrats always commit voter fraud. It certainly happens frequently here in WA. But then, you’re a lying Marxist activist who spouts nothing but democrat propaganda.

          2. Yes racist tony, we agree you think minorities are too stupid to follow voting laws.

        2. I think the account "Tony" is almost certainly a bot.

          1. Sadly, no, that's a real person being that dumb.

      1. What was the Politifact rating?

      2. did they poll a group of psychics or something?

      3. That's the one I was talking about!

        "There are many unique challenges facing election officials this year, but widespread malfeasance isn't one of them."

        ----Eric Boehm

        Boehm's article might be titled something like, "Pre-Election Investigation Proves that No One Stuffed the Ballot Box".

        1. Pre-crime department predicts no crime during election except by the GOP, arrest them now

    4. Stuffing the ballot box is actually HARDER with mail in voting, because each ballot is traceable to the owner. In a precinct, at the end of the evening, the poll officials can look at the list of people who didn't show up, and fill out ballots for them.

      With mail in ballots, the ballot is unique to me. If I check in at a precinct and my mail in ballot shows up to be counted, it will be discarded. For someone to stuff mail in ballots, they need to steal ballots going out the week before, and hope that all those people don't complain, and/or vote in person.

      1. Is that how it works at Donnybrook Farm? In my area it's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes.

      2. Ya? And if the mail in ballot has already been received in a state with no voter ID requirement, how do they know which one (in-person or mail-in) is valid and which to throw out?

        You don't have to worry about people showing up to the polls in person if they're dead. Or if they moved out of the state/precinct years ago and haven't voted since. Or if you plan on destroying ballots for your opposition candidate rather than generating new ballots for the candidate you support...

        1. Those are mostly concerns unrelated to mail in voting. Yes, if the person counting, or processing ballots in the government is corrupt, then you are going to have fraud- irrespective of whether or not the ballots being counted were mail-in or from a precinct.

          But with a mail-in ballot, you know 1) whether it was mailed to you, 2) whether it was received back at the state, and 3) whether it was counted (or discarded for some reason). I can go on a website after the election and see all of that. I cannot do the same for in person voting. All I know is whether "I" went to a precinct.

          Mail in voting is substantially more secure.

  9. What is Trump up to here? Part I...

    WHEN have far-right nut-jobs ever responded to clearly dangerous LIES, with ridiculous levels of totally unjustified violence?
    Answer: Pizzagate! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory

    1. What is Trump up to here? Part II…

      HERE are the lies being told NOW, to right-wing nut-jobs, in hopes of stirring up “Pizza-Gate Part II”!
      A list of the times Trump has said he won’t accept the election results or leave office if he loses
      Essential heart and core of the LIE by Trump: “ANY election results not confirming MEEE as Your Emperor, MUST be fraudulent!”

      From link above:
      September 13 rally: “The Democrats are trying to rig this election because that’s the only way they’re going to win,” he said.

      So THERE you have it, Trump lovers!!! Your VERY best argument for voting for Trump! Share it with your friends:

      "If you do NOT vote for Trump, the Proud Boys and others will FUCK YOU UP! They are standing back, and standing by, RIGHT NOW!"

      1. And Hillary told Biden not to concede no matter what either.

        I'm not saying Trump's claim is good, but how is it any different than Team D?

        1. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8746071/Joe-Biden-says-accept-election-results-count-vote-slams-Trump.html

          Joe Biden says he will accept the 'full election results and count every vote' as he slams Donald Trump for refusing to agree to accept them in advance

          1. Ah yes, Biden says that even he doesn't win, its because not all of the right votes were counted.

            When did the Democrats accept the results of the 2016 election?

  10. 700K votes in one county will flip House races.

    Affidavits Allege Texas Democrat Officials Involved In Mail-In Ballot Harvesting Scheme; Democrats Deny

    “I have been made aware of a law enforcement investigation in the Spring of 2020 regarding illegal ballot harvesting,” Marler continued. “Several interviews of individuals were conducted. After the interviews became public, former Harris County Clerk Diane Trautman resigned, alleging health concerns due to COVID-19. However, witnesses have told me that Ms. Trautman was arguing with Commission[er] Rodney Ellis about the legality of mass purchasing and mailing of mail-in ballots and that Trautman was concerned she would be included in the eventual arrest pertaining to illegal ballot harvesting. Instead of coming forward and exposing the scheme, Ms. Trautman abruptly resigned. Witnesses have stated that Commissioner Ellis was not deterred and continued to move forward with the plan to mass mail ballots and expand the illegal ballot harvesting scam. Another witness stated to me that an employee of Commission[er] Ellis, Tyler James, has bragged that he could guarantee that the illegal ballot harvesting operation, with the help of mass mail-in ballots, could harvest 700,000 illegal ballots.”

    1. The thing is, they really don't need to do that in Harris County House races. All of the seats are either D, or so massively gerrymandered for R that losing them would be as unlikely as Texas going for Biden this election. Maybe there's a pick em Texas State House or Senate seat in this county, but I expect the regular House seats to stay where they were two years ago.

      Massive fraud will be the order of the day, and it will lead to either blood or bondage.

  11. Voter fraud is a virtually nonexistent problem. Ballot "harvesting" is not associated with any fraud. Any policy that restricts the ease of voting predicated on this is without any dispute a measure to suppress the vote for partisan gain. Any pundit or judge who says otherwise is an agent of those antidemocratic forces.

    1. Voter fraud is a virtually nonexistent problem.

      Paterson, NJ called. They wanted me to tell you something, but they were laughing so hard I couldn't understand them.

      1. I don't need to cherry pick anecdotes to prove my case that Republicans are trying to rig the election nationwide for partisan gain. They'll tell you if they ask. They'll even tell you which demographics they want to suppress.

        1. Okay. Prove your caes.

          1. If you know anything about history you'll know that fake claims of voter fraud, and countless other horseshit excuses, have been employed to suppress minority votes, and this is once we deigned to stop poll taxing them.

            A serious person would be working all day and all night to fix that longstanding problem before they even thought about in-person voter fraud. Are you a serious person or do you just want Republicans to win even if they have to cheat and ruin democracy to do it?

              1. So in that one example that people keep bringing up as a reason to suppress voting en masse is a case where law enforcement dealt with the problem. No extra policy needed. There are also the other cases of mostly Republicans committing voter fraud, and they get caught too. Why do you want to cull hundreds of thousands of legitimate votes to solve a problem that is already solved?

                1. Your claim was that it was Republicans committing voter fraud. But, Democrats do it too. Here is another example:


                  The rest of your reply does not warrant any further comment.

                  1. I can cherry pick cases of Republicans committing voter fraud too. You guys seem to struggle real hard with the concept that cherry picking is not the same as understanding data.

                    The difference is I think law enforcement and legal incentives deal with in-person voter fraud sufficiently, and I do not call for legislation to make it harder for old white Republicans to vote.

                    1. Your point is that it is Republicans committing voter fraud. Democrats do it too.

                      Stay on point.

                    2. Stay on point.

                      Tony is stocking up on straw men for Halloween.

                    3. Tony, you were asked to prove your case; you attempted to prove your case to Geiger and you singularly failed at that task.

                    4. Prove what case? That voter fraud is a myth and a time-tested excuse for racist oligarchs to keep brown people from voting? Read a history book. I’m not your goddamn teacher. Prove that there isn’t actually a phantom plague of voter fraud that isn’t being caught by law enforcement already? Not my burden.

                    5. You already claimed that voter fraud doesn't happen...

            1. Yes, anything that disputes the democrat narrative is ‘fake’ to you. You are a mindless drone. An empty vessel to be filled with both democrat propaganda and whatever ever random cock comes your way at your local bathhouse.

    2. demographics they want to suppress.

      people more motivated by bribery then civic duty?

      1. Just say what you really mean. Grow some balls and stop talking in euphemisms.

        1. I thought I did say what I mean. What do YOU mean? You want me to say something racist so you'll feel better about your own moral deficiencies?

          1. You did say something racist, you just refuse to admit it because you are ashamed of your own political beliefs.

            I'm not ashamed of one political position I hold. I will explain it without resorting to any euphemisms. It's a better way to live.

            Not that implying that people who simply disagree with you on public policy should be restricted from voting isn't bad enough.

            1. 'You did say something racist, you just refuse to admit it because you are ashamed of your own political beliefs"

              What was it?

              1. I said Republicans will admit that they want to restrict the franchise for certain demographics, Iap83 correctly surmised I was talking about brown people, and then he implied that brown people have some genetic disposition to socialism, and that it is therefore good to suppress their vote.

                I don't know how this could be any clearer.

                1. Ahh, ok. Tony pictures brown people in his head when he reads the word "bribery". I get it now.

                  1. …….which is very odd, because there are very few black people who are also Democrat politicians. I don't even know how he came up with that association.

                2. The only commenter to mention anything about "brown" people in this entire thread .... is you.

                  You are completely making things up.

            2. Did I interrupt an argument you were having with the voices in your head? Sorry, I'll let you get back to it.

    3. Summary: Voter fraud doesn't exist, and when MY side does it, its not REALLY fraud, its just us trying to make sure everybody who's allowed to vote and a lot of those who aren't, get to!

  12. expanded mail-in voting—an arrangement made necessary by the COVID-19 pandemic

    No. Mail-in voting might be a result of the panic, the expanded part where they mail out unsolicited ballots to everybody is not.

    1. The only reason Trump made this distinction is so the olds in Florida would have an easier chance voting. You can't explain why one is OK and the other isn't. This is all about election rigging for Republican advantage. There is literally no other motivation here, and you should know that.

      1. You are so full of it. If you wanted to make sure everyone had the opportunity to vote, you would have just encouraged people to request absentee ballots. But that's NOT what happened. Nope, the Dems jumped straight to "mail ballots to EVERYONE." Why? Because it's about election rigging for the Dem's advantage. There is literally no other motivation here, and you should know that.There is literally no other motivation here, and you should know that.

        1. Tony doesn’t care. He will just spout whatever he is ordered to by his democrat overseers.

  13. Trump appears to be laying out a rationale to challenge the results of the election after it's finished

    So? Seriously, so the fuck what? If he loses, he will whine, cry, file challenges and, at the end of the day, will still have lost. The electors are not going to pull off a coup for Trump. The state courts are not going to pull off a coup for Trump. The SCOTUS is not going to pull off a coup for Trump. There is no conspiracy by which Trump can assume the Presidency.

    Boehm is as bad as SQRLSY with the Trumptator fan-fiction.

    1. I thought his getting infected with covid might flip a switch somewhere, since you know it affected him personally. But no, he actually turned it into more "Covid isn't that serious" propaganda. He always goes further than even I expect him do, so I don't know what's wrong about being vigilant.

      It's clear that he's going to cause problems if he loses. Wishful thinking that an establishment that has enabled him thus far will turn on him is fine, but probably not as helpful as vigilance.

      Plus what happens when someone who doesn't explain how he's going to cheat in detail gets in power and does it anyway?

      1. Trump is being decidedly honest about the virus. It is not a plague. Chances are overwhelming that if you contract it, you will experience only mild symptoms -- no worse than what you would experience with a cold or flu. The fear of contracting the virus should not prevent people from living their lives. Effective medical treatment exists. Life is life, so live it, because the virus is here to stay.

        The notion that everyone has to remain locked down forever with masks over their faces until the virus magically disappears and nobody ever dies again is absurd. But this is the notion that Democrats are pushing.

        1. Because Republicans have proven themselves so trustworthy on matters of science and public health. Because Trump surrounds himself with honest people and hasn't been getting rid of anyone who doesn't tell him what he wants to hear systematically. Because he's not lying now about the severity of his own case.

          Be a libertarian and stop trusting politicians. Republicans want you to die for their electoral advantage. You'd think that would piss you off.

          1. Your response has nothing to do with my comment. Stay on point.

            1. You're regurgitating Trump lies on covid contradicting CDC and every medical professional on the planet. I don't know how you people even get out of bed in the morning.

              1. "You’re regurgitating Trump lies on covid contradicting CDC and every medical professional on the planet."

                Only a lunatic would make this kind of statement with such fervor.

                1. A third of non-hospital covid cases result in long-term disability. Also, 210,000 Americans and a million humans have died from it. I guess whether it's serious is a matter of opinion.

                  1. "Every medical professional on the planet.”

                    Stay on point. Or, at least admit when you are making statements that are absurd on their face.

                    1. It's a moot point. Even without government restrictions, people freely choose to social distance to avoid getting sick. We see it every day with restaurants and bars being fully open and people still not going to them.

                      Do you want government to force them to go back in public or what?

                    2. Stay on point.

                      It is very difficult to follow your disjointed comments.

                    3. Do you gaslight your woman like this?

                  2. A third of non-hospital covid cases result in long-term disability.

                    WTF are you going on about now? That would be 2.5 million with long term disabilities. You are full of shit.

                    1. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/monumental-acknowledgment-cdc-reports-long-term-covid-19-patients-n1234814

                      If I’m going to serve as everyone’s private Google, I think I should get paid a little.

                  3. Look! COVID-19 deaths are closing in on the ANNUAL number of people DOCTORS kill every year!

                  4. And nearly all people who died with WuFlu had severe co-morbidity. None of which a sociopath like you cares about anyway. You just want to milk this ‘crisis’ to infringe in our freedoms.
                    You need to go.

              2. Those medical professionals and the CDC contradict THEMSELVES constantly.

                Not to mention "accidentally" killing between 210-420 THOUSAND people a year...

          2. Tony, fer fuck's sake, you state yourself that politicians lie. If you don't understand that Fauci and Redfield are politicians, it is willful ignorance. If you don't get that doctors are lying about COVID because they get money for treating COVID cases, it is willful ignorance. Quit trusting agents of the governments and the toadies that are profiting from government payments because they reinforce your deep seated OMB syndrome.

            1. So doctors count as politicians, but the president is telling the truth?

              1. This sounds like a comment by an algorithm that is very slowly learning the form and function of sentences in English.

              2. doctors count as politicians

                Your reading comprehension is below abysmal.

                1. Maybe, but he is definitely disingenuous too.

      2. I don’t know what’s wrong about being vigilant.

        Holy fuck! There you are just upthread rambling about 'suppressing the franchise' because of the calls for vigilance in watching the polling stations.

        Does the cognitive dissonance really not affect you in the slightest?

        I pointed out that, "If he loses, he will whine, cry, file challenges and, at the end of the day, will still have lost." Your comeback is, basically, "but, but... ORANGEMANBAD!"

        Please, eat some more cookies and STFU.

        1. You be vigilant about problems that are known to exist. In that case, the problem isn't phony voter fraud lies, it's the president calling on Nazis to intimidate voters.

          1. "[I]t’s the president calling on Nazis to intimidate voters."

            This never happened.

            1. Saw it with my own eyes.

              1. When? Where? Do you have evidence?

                1. He called for poll watchers at the debate, something that is illegal in my state by the way, and then he told Proud Boys to stand by. The Proud Boys heard it, whether or not you did.

                  1. Please provide a direct citation.

                    1. The Account Named Tony heard a dog whistle.

                  2. You mean the group led by an Afro-Cuban man? They are really doing that Nazi thing wrong if you bother to look at reality rather than the fiction in your head.

                    1. I mostly just wanted to get someone to come to the defense of the proud boys, which I knew would happen.

                      So there are members of the KKK who will swear up and down that they aren’t racist. That they’re just in it to protect “western civilization.” That a member of the KKK might have come from Siberia last year while black Americans have been part of the west for half a millennium is not really relevant to the motives.

                    2. "I mostly just wanted to get someone to come to the defense of the proud boys, which I knew would happen.
                      So there are members of the KKK who will swear up and down that they aren’t racist. That they’re just in it to protect “western civilization.” That a member of the KKK might have come from Siberia last year while black Americans have been part of the west for half a millennium is not really relevant to the motives."

                      Translated from shitstain:
                      "I got busted for lying AGAIN and now I'm trying to deflect attention away from my dishonest statements as a steaming pile of lefty shit."

                    3. Tony. You can say that the Proud Boys are people with bad policies who resort to violence too quickly. I might listen.

                      However, if you insist that they are white supremacists, the fact that their leader is named Enrique is an extremely valid counterpoint. They fact that they admit everyone into their group is a valid counterpoint. White supremacy isn't some nebulous philosophy you can stumble into. It's a clear set of ideals and goals. Ideals and Goals that are incompatible with minority leaders.

                      The fact that your response is a "but still they are" is just denying basic reality.

                    4. Tony denies basic reality.

                2. In his fever dreams.

              2. Lying

          2. it’s the president calling on Nazis to intimidate voters.

            I deserve that. You got me monologuing, and I let my guard down. I should have seen the jump to Nazis coming. I should have known you never had any intention of not going all 'argumentum absurdum'.

            I will give regards to Enrique Tarrio for you.

            1. It’s presidentum as absurdum. That’s the problem here. He is not only a known racist, he is not only known to associate with the dregs of society, everyone understands that when someone shows him undying support, like the Nazis do, he gets a little boner.

              The Nazis don’t support Trump in spite of his cosmopolitan pro-diversity viewpoints, I’m sure you’ll agree.

              1. "...He is not only a known racist, he is not only known to associate with the dregs of society, everyone understands that when someone shows him undying support, like the Nazis do, he gets a little boner."

                More lies from the steaming pile of lefty shit.

              2. Richard Spencer has endorsed Biden.

                1. It’s a big tent party.

      3. "...But no, he actually turned it into more “Covid isn’t that serious” propaganda..."

        Trump gets the 'rona, turns out not to be serious, and him pointing this out is "propaganda" to shitstain.
        So any fact which shitstain doesn't like is "propaganda".

  14. It's true. There's no data that ANYONE can find that proves or suggests voter fraud is a massive problem. You can sure find one offs and other individual cases those aren't indicative of massive voter fraud. They just aren't.

    PROVIDE evidence that there is massive voter fraud and that will change my mind. It's not up to me to prove a negative. if you are a proponent massive voter fraud it's on you to provide the evidence.

    1. "It’s not up to me to prove a negative."

      It is not up to anyone else to do your research for you.

      1. Sounds like he has done his research and it suggests there are small cases of voter fraud (usually double voting). Rob's research suggest what most of us know that massive voter fraud, that is enough to swing an election, has never been proven.

        1. "Rob’s research suggest what most of us know that massive voter fraud, that is enough to swing an election, has never been proven."

          Prove that it has never been proven.

          1. There you have it. The absence of proof is proof itself. QAnon could not have said it better.

        2. No because people like him make it impossible to gather evidence by declaring any tool racist or illegitimate then turn around and declare no problem exists because they prevented the investigation in the first place.

          Kind of like defunding the police, shutting down 911 and declaring there has been a drop in crime because nobody was available to take a call or file a report.

          1. So how would you gather evidence? How would you show that fraud is happening?

        3. Its never been proven because anytime someone wants to study it, the argument goes right back to the beginning:

          "We don't need to study it because it's not a widespread problem."

        4. Yeah--like the small case of voter fraud undertaken in Miami right before the 2000 presidential race.

          It was so small that the cheating, Democrat mayor of Miami was removed from office and replaced with his opponent, the actual winner.

    2. So Rob, I am guessing it would bother you that 319,000+ mail in votes were rejected during the primary process in 2020. Is that massive enough?

  15. As with most human things, it comes down to what fetish you prefer to indulge.

    On one side we have the Sacrament of the Vote. Anything that even hints that some believers will not experience the holy ritual gets these people ready for jihad.

    On the other side we have the Sacred Purity of the Count. Anything that might contaminate the ballot box defiles the Holy See, and gets these people ready for crusade.

    Of course, some people might want to exploit these fetishes for political purposes, so don't believe what you hear. But it does make for good theater.

  16. So I double checked yesterday, and my voter registration in GA is still "Active" - even though I moved to Florida 2 years ago.
    There's no way I know of to correct that. The website certainly won't let you do it.
    I lived in an entirely D controlled county (John Lewis' district).

    1. There’s no way I know of to correct that.

      You mean there's no way you know of to suppress the voting rights of the person who wants to vote in your name? /Tony

      1. So should Nardz be forbidden from voting? What's your policy idea here? Is it reducing drop-off locations to one per county in Texas? How does that help? Is it reducing polling locations in urban districts? How does that help fix this problem?

        It grows wearisome explaining to libertarians when the government is trying to take their freedoms on false pretenses. You'd think you'd be sensitive to that.

        Who would have thought that you'd champion any and all attacks on freedom as long as they helped a certain political faction have power.

        1. Do you ever actually read the comments you are responding to?

        2. Tony, I know you're simple but it should be obvious even to you that Nardz is complaining about being registered as an active voter in two states.

          1. Sounds like that's a problem for Nardz to solve. I want to know how making it more difficult for black people to vote even addresses that problem.

            1. "I want to know how making it more difficult for black people to vote even addresses that problem."

              Explain. This statement is not responsive to any of the comments, above.

            2. You really should reflect on why you instantly picture black people whenever someone brings up criminal behavior. It's not a good trait to have.

              1. Algorithms tend to be racist.

                1. Lefties, too.

            3. Tony: totally stupid, totally dishonest, totally racist - perfect Democrat.

            4. To Tony, black people are too stupid to do things like show ID, or fill out a ballot, out it in an envelope, then out that envelope in another envelope.

              Tony is racist.

  17. It should be noted that while Wisconsin does not allow processing of ballots before election day, they have a good system to handle ballots. I believe that all ballots that arrive by election day will be counted within a day or two. Ballots postmarked on election day but arriving later could be an issue. Hopefully everyone in Wisconsin votes early by mail or drop site or vote in person on election day. If so, I think we will have a count well before by the end of the week.

  18. It's not ballots being dumped in rivers I'm worried about, it's rivers of ballots on the dash of some DNC ballot harvester's car, unopened, that he got from the old folks home... you know, the group that's mysteriously swinging Biden in the last 24 hours?

    1. So now the polls are being faked?

      What's mysterious about it? Trump had his largest audience in years and almost literally crapped all over the stage. Then he got infected with the very disease he has been downplaying.

      Not to mention the stated Republican/libertarian policy of dealing with Covid by locking up all old people forever. If anyhting you should wonder why any old people are sticking with him at all.

      1. "Not to mention the stated Republican/libertarian policy of dealing with Covid by locking up all old people forever."

        Policy? Explain.

        1. They'll probably even admit to that one. Come on.

          Now you provide evidence that you care about learning something here today or I'm going to stop listening to your incessant demands.

          1. This bot is ridiculous.

              1. That’s just what your mom said.

                1. Your persona is that of a gay male, fuckwit.

                  1. Damnit, I'm contributing to the problem.

        2. “Not to mention the stated Republican/libertarian policy of dealing with Covid by locking up all old people forever.”

          The steaming pile of lefty shit keeps repeating this lie in the hopes that someone will fall for it.
          The only people promoting 'locking people up are cowardly assholes like you, JFree and other lefty scum.

        3. You see, just like in the '60s, the parties "switched" again. Cuomo is now a Republican, so is Whitmer.

          Get with the program!

      2. the very disease he has been downplaying

        He has been downplaying the disease that a 74 year-old man got over in 3 days. Did you have another point, or do you just want to emote about Nazi boogeymen some more?

        1. He could barely catch a breath last night. No doctor anyone has found except his own understands why he was sent home when he was, except for the fact that he has an ER in his house. He’s not recovered. The course of the disease suggests he could be on a ventilator by the weekend. Or not. It’s not that predictable. It’s still killed 210,000 people and has crippled the executive branch.

          1. Steaming pile of lefty shit now provides medical diagnostics.
            Hint: Steaming pile of lefty shit is full of shit.

          2. Well, Covid-19 would certainly take care of a pathetic serf like you. Coward.

            1. A large majority of the country doesn’t want Trump as president.

          3. Tony says a bunch of things not reflected by reality. So it must be A day ending in ‘y’.

  19. How about don't buy anything from him? He lies all the time. Only an idiot actually listens to what this moron is saying.

    1. Are you looking in a mirror, lefty scum?

  20. Why? Because they're dumped into creeks?

  21. they're not dumping any ballots in rivers, can't harvest them when they're soggy

  22. Don't Buy Trump's Conspiracy Theories About Ballots Being Dumped in Rivers

    Widespread election fraud is a real possibility in this election, and you just dismiss it as "conspiracy theories". But what can you expect from people who think Antifa and BLM are "just ideas".

    1. So who is the head of Antifa, what is its structure, what is its stated goals? From what I see its about as real as Santa Claus.

      1. "So who is the head of Antifa, what is its structure, what is its stated goals? From what I see its about as real as Santa Claus."

        Oh, aren't you cute!
        Tell us how the Weather Underground leadership was structured.

      2. So who is the head of Antifa, what is its structure, what is its stated goals?

        Antifa has the structure of a typical terrorist and revolutionary group: they are leaderless and organized in cells and chapters. As such, they don't have a "head", though at times individuals may be perceived as such. Its goals (stated or not) are the overthrow of liberal free market democracies (which they call "fascist") and its replacement with a socialist-Marxist state.

        Any other issues you're confused about?

    2. Do you have any intention of accepting the results of an election that Joe Biden wins?

      1. If he wins it fairly? Sure.

        But fair means ALL of the valid ballots count and NONE of the invalid ballots count. But you wouldn't agree to that statement...

        1. Of course I would. You live in a fantasy world.

      2. Do you have any intention of accepting the results of an election that Joe Biden wins?

        Yes, Tony, unlike you and the Democrats, I'm a law abiding citizens and not a revolutionary. If Joe Biden wins, even if it is by massive voter fraud, I will accept the election.

        Of course, I would likely retire, stop paying six figures in taxes, and move abroad. There is no point in fighting with stupid people like you over the dregs of a country.

        1. Good luck finding a non-shithole country that is more right-wing than the US.

          1. It’s time to make all of your kind leave the US forever.

          2. Most of Europe is more conservative than the US: governed by Christian conservatives, with established churches, restricted abortion, restricted immigration, lower taxes on the wealthy, less redistribution, rationed medical care.

            Europe isn't a good place to make money or have a career, but it's a great place to retire as a wealthy American.

  23. "Here's the rub: He was caught changing them from Democrat to Republican."

    No, that's not the rub. We keep trying to tell you that voter fraud is real, that there are systematic weaknesses, and that anyone can do it. Then you see cases of Republicans committing voter fraud and you use those to argue against the existence of fraud?

    The #1 concern that remains with mail-in voting is not direct fraud, but legitimate ballots not being counted due to irregularities. Hundreds of thousands of legitimate ballots were not counted in earlier primaries this year. This is a massive concern and you cannot ignore such a risk. Willful ignorance of this issue may as well be fraud because you're acting with gross negligence.

    1. Yeah, that ain't the rub at all. And trust me, if Trump wins this election WITH mail-in voting, you will see the most rapid 180 turn by the DNC and the press on how voter fraud is a myth.

      1. DING DING DING!

  24. Amazing how many anti-Trumpers there are among Libertarians.

    The only alternative to Trump will destroy anything Libertarian about this country except for the extreme LGBTRME agenda, abortion, open borders and lawlessness.

    1. Some of us are libertarians for lawless gay abortions. Don’t we get a voice?

      1. You, OTOH, are a steaming pile of lefty shit.

      2. Tony, there is nothing libertarian about you. Why can't you be honest for once in your life and just admit you are a miserable progressive?

      3. Tony, you are the antithesis of a libertarian.

  25. the thing with mail in voting its very easy to not count the votes from known voting districts until needed. some counties in California have mail in voting and they have stated that they don't always count all the ballots If it appears that statistically it wouldn't change the outcome. So simple solution count the districts that mostly vote your way first then claim the rest are statistically useless. Done

    1. Except that would not work. It is not a statistical calculation it is math calculation. If candidate A is ahead by 5000 votes and there are 4000 absentee ballots left to count then the outcome will not change and counting the votes is only an academic exercise.

  26. Sounds like one of the two major parties realize their front man is going to lose big, and are paving the way so they won't have to concede.

    Just like the Democrats spent four years complaining the Russkies stole their election, it will be four years of the Republicans complaining about ballots found in a dumpster.

    "We would have won if not for your meddling COVID-19 viruses!"

    1. Trust me, if Trump wins, the Democrats will suddenly find their distrust of shady mail-in voting.

      1. We would not even be discussing election fraud if Trump thought he would win.

        1. We know you will try to cheat, and some still think the issue of leftist tyranny and psychosis is solvable without a ton of bloodshed.
          I have my doubts.

        2. Let's ignore 99.999% of the media coverage from 2016-2020

        3. "We would not even be discussing election fraud if Trump thought he would win."

          Yep, psychological analysis from some adolescent is worth, well, pretty much zero.

      2. Does it even to matter to you whether there is actually a real problem? Like, do facts even go into your thoughts on this, or any, subject?

        1. More hypocrisy from Tony.

    2. Provide tangible evidence, not imaginary constructs like polls, that Biden is winning.
      Because Trump can point to real things like rally crowds, parades, boat parades, yard signs, etc that show a massive advantage for him.

      1. The New York Times gives him an 80% chance of winning.

        1. When and where did the NYT says this? I think your off here.

        2. Through polls, Paul, as you well know.

          Fuck it, maybe this country is debased enough to elect Biden.

        3. And that's it.
          The only signs in Biden's favor are completely imaginary.
          They all depend on bald assertion, mass media messaging, and all of us ignoring or discounting the real things we see with our own eyes

          1. Wow Jesus Christ you are stupid.

            1. Such a substantive rebuttal

              1. There is an appalling lack of mental discipline with you people. Polls are a conspiracy. Uh huh. When the election outcome tracks pretty cleanly with the polls, both the polls and the vote will have been rigged by the lizard people, right?

            2. Tony, every person here that you attempt to troll is vastly more intelligent than you are. You constantly embarrass yourself in your feeble attempts at argument. However, you lack both the intellect and the capacity for self awareness to understand that.

      2. I listened to a conservative talk show host in the 1990s. People always called in about yards signs saying it was a prognosticator of elections. The host, Mark Belling, always told the caller that they were way off base and that yard sign don't tell anything. Same for the rest of your indicators. If polls were so bad or far off they would not be in demand. And the important polls are the one you hear about, the important ones are the campaign's internal polling. These are the polls that has Trump upset.

        1. You have lies.
          That's it.
          Even the name you've chosen here is a lie.
          You know honestly representing your position would be a loser.
          And you're reaching the limit of our patience.

        2. "I listened to a conservative talk show host in the 1990s...."

          Either every bit of evidence that you're an adolescent is wrong, or you're someone older who never managed to grow up.
          Lying or pathetic...

        3. Polls are in demand because they are used to as messaging to:
          1. Demoralize the party they SAY is losing in the polls
          2. Encourage people to vote for the party the polls SAY is already ahead

          Polls are a psychological tool used to make themselves come true, they're no more than self-fulfilling prophecies.

  27. I bet your articles next month will be a riot.

    Here’s to Reason greatly improving their hiring standards.

  28. What is the Team Red endgame here, by intentionally creating doubt about the voting process itself? Do they not realize that this strategy will create more cynicism and distrust in the entire system itself, lowering turnout for Team Red voters as well as for Team Blue voters? Have they not thought through the long-term consequences of creating a climate of cynicism about elections themselves?

    1. Their endgame is power, and control. Obtaining both meant securing, at a minimum, the minority vote. Rigging a few elections, stuffing some ballot boxes, even gerrymandering would hardly secure that vote. Something more permanent was necessary.

      Indoctrination was needed. Convince the minorities, especially the black community, that dependence, entitlements and system racism were all coin of the realm unless democrats were voted into office.

      That drumbeat began in the 60s and has steadily risen to a crescendo. It has reached Orwellian levels. Voting anything but democrat by them is now Original Sin. Ask the media, academia, or the social justice warriors.

      “Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia. “

      There’s the focus of the endgame. Perpetuate the myths.

    2. It's almost like we've forgotten our own very recent history. I know 2006 in modern context is like talking about the paleolithic era, but some of us remember it.

      Unfortunately, my comment goes into moderation hell if I insert more than one link, so I'll just insert one as a baseline.

      It's like we've forgotten that one of the biggest controversies over the early 2000s. E-voting was constantly hammered (more often than not by progressives) as the biggest threat to free and fair elections since Kennedy mysteriously won West Virginia. E-voting, whatever its flaws, pales in comparison to a sudden push for mass mail-in voting.

      Mass mail-in voting is being pushed by Democrats (in my opinion) precisely because they know it can be challenged. They spread the idea that mail-in voting is iron-clad and completely without any evidence of fraud (after pushing e-voting conspiracies for a decade), but are waiting in the wings to challenge it on its own flaws if Trump wins.

      And in fairness, I suspect the Republicans will "forget" any controversies over mail-in voting if Trump wins. But hey, that's politics.

    3. Because I really, really want to post more than one link.

      How to Hack an Election in 7 Minutes
      With Russia already meddling in 2016, a ragtag group of obsessive tech experts is warning that stealing the ultimate prize—victory on Nov. 8—would be child’s play.

      That was early 2016, while Democrats were desperately grasping at any straw to de-legitimize the 2016 election.

      We got 3.9 years of harangue from the media about how completely fragile our democracy was, allowing Donald Trump to win due to a few animated gifs on Facebook, and now suddenly our election systems are iron-clad, nothing to see here.

      At least the criticisms of mail-in voting are rational. They may be wrong... but they're based in rationality.

    4. "What is the Team Red endgame here"

      This is about giving Trump something to blame for losing the election. Something that makes him the aggrieved victim of a conspiracy rather than the result of his own mismanaged campaign. There's no team here, but Trump.

      Team Red can dispel a lot of the cynicism and distrust by denouncing and dumping Trump at the first opportunity. A fresh start, and all that. I suppose potential successors are plotting and maneuvering at this moment.

      1. This is about giving Trump something to blame for losing the election.

        So why are the Democrats pushing so hard to give him something to blame?

        1. Democrats have an interest in expanding the vote just as Trump has one to suppress it. Hence the conflict.

          "So why are the Democrats pushing so hard to give him something to blame?"

          Because Trump is not a Democrat. When you're a jet you're a jet all the way.

          1. Weird that democrats have such an interest in expanding the vote when they've shown for years that they're unable to pass their agenda legislatively, thus have to rely on the court for activist rulings.
            It's logically inconsistent.

            1. "Weird that democrats have such an interest in expanding the vote"

              It's no weirder than republicans wanting to suppress the vote. If you acknowledge the one you must acknowledge the other. If only for the logical consistency of it all. It's been this way for decades, and high time you catch up.

              1. Not at all.
                Your characterization of Rs "wanting to suppress the vote" is empty rhetoric. The US has the easiest voting requirements in the world. If you allege "suppression", come up with an example, and an alternative that you wouldn't classify as such.

                The truth of it is: you're not nearly as intelligent as you think, and your commentary here is embarrassing.
                It's like a high schooler's programmed bot for CS class.
                I deigned to respond to you this time, but don't count on it in the future.
                Please do keep posting though. Like sqrlsy, you're good for demonstrating the shallowness of leftist ability.

                1. "and high time you catch up."

                  Oh, how I do enjoy the slips of insecurity!
                  Such a tell.

                2. "Your characterization of Rs “wanting to suppress the vote” is empty rhetoric. "

                  Your idea is that both parties want to expand the vote?

                  Thank you for responding, by the way and I'm glad you will continue to read my comments here, though you may no longer deign to respond as you did today.

  29. Eric, I hope you are not tired from carrying Biden's water to read this post. Excerpt from article written by Chair of the FEC, Trey Trainor:

    "In addition to real-time election fiascos that have occurred already this year, we have seen numerous examples of active voter fraud taking place in multiple states. A Philadelphia election judge and former U.S. congressman, for instance, has been charged for stuffing ballot boxes on behalf of three candidates. In New Jersey, four men have been charged with voter fraud and ballot theft by the state’s attorney general. Also, in New Jersey, 2,300 ballots were disqualified after it was revealed that the signatures on the ballots did not match the signatures on the registration cards.

    In West Virginia, a postal carrier pled guilty to changing the political affiliation on multiple ballots. A family in Atlanta received a voter-registration form addressed to their cat, which had died twelve years earlier. Just last week, nine mailed-in military ballots in Pennsylvania were found tossed into a garbage can because the voters did not have control of their own ballot from the time they filled it out to its delivery point."

    Full article here: https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/10/vote-by-mail-the-unintended-consequences/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

  30. How easily Reason forgets all of the times Democrats have conducted vote fraud throughout the years, probably starting with Boss Tweed of Tammany Hall days. Then there was the Reconstruction Era in the South when Democrats would stuff ballot boxes to deny black Republican candidates election to political office.

    Plus don't forget all of the instances of vote fraud (including by mail) outlined by John Fund in his book "Stealing Elections". Even The New York Times observed some time ago that mail in ballots can be wrought with fraud.

    So the claim that Trump spins "conspiracy theories" while ignoring the history of his opponents says more about Reason than it says about him.

    1. "So the claim that Trump spins “conspiracy theories” while ignoring the history of his opponents says more about Reason than it says about him."

      He accused Clinton of vote rigging to the tune of 3 million fraudulent ballots. Almost 4 years later still no charges filed. More history for you to ignore.

      1. That would probably be because California's AG wouldn't allow any examination of their elections, despite the fact that multiple counties recorded more votes than registered voters.

        1. If the California AG is allowed to participate in vote rigging without facing any consequences, you're essentially incentivizing election rigging. You get the elections you deserve.

          1. Lol.
            You think you're making a point - bless your heart!

            1. I'm pointing out the hollowness of your assertions.

      2. And Clinton, with permission from her boss, hired foreign actors (one of whom was a Russian spy and likely national security risk) to illegitimate the 2016 election...and 4 years later you're all still acting like Russia helped Trump and HE'S the one sowing doubt on our elections...

        1. "and HE’S the one sowing doubt on our elections…"

          What's wrong with that? The elections should have doubt sewn upon them.

  31. Duh -
    Everyone knows that they're actually being dumped in incinerators.

    P.S. They faked the moon landings by using a sound stage on Mars.

  32. We are supposed to blindly trust Democrats, whose party is now in the firm grip of outright Marxists and Communists, who will do any and everything to destroy Trump and steal the election? Listen to any TV news station and you will hear Trump being blamed for any and everything. Name me one time Democrats have been blamed for anything? We are talking about people who will go outside the law to see Trump votes destroyed. Only a Biden voter would think that Trump will not lose votes...more than likely burned up by antifarts and blmers who peacefully burn down cites.

    1. "Name me one time Democrats have been blamed for anything?"

      Read the comments. Lots of people blaming Democrats for lots of things.

      1. Not by the media.

        1. Journalists and publishers traditionally lean left. Benjamin Franklin was in on a revolution.America's first profitable newspaper was published in New York by an abolitionist, the SJWs of their day. Leftist publishers led the fight against censorship, even of non leftist authors ie Burroughs' Naked Lunch.

          It's hardly surprising that they are not supporting Trump. Journalism and conservatism are not a natural fit.

  33. Back when Jose Canseco published his expose on MLB on steroids, there were some people who laughed at his assertion. I remember one local sports radio guy saying "The people on drugs are probably 20%"

    There is almost certainly voter fraud and non citizens voting in elections. If you think the local governments that run your DMV can effectively filter out fraud, there are bridges to be sold. The only question is, does it happen at a large scale.

    An anon vote fraudster recently went to the NY Post and described how he changed votes. The method seems mostly plausible and would not be detected in investigations unless the voter was contacted directly.


    It's probably happening more often than not. Ilhan Omar's associate was caught trying to buy ballots recently. Once you hand strangers your ballots, shennanigans can occur. Much like the baseball steroids or Weinstein saga, we're just waiting for insiders to make the expose.

    1. If you don't elect politicians who can work together to eliminate fraud, you get what you deserve. Whinging about fraud 4 weeks before the election shows the lack of interest in straightening out the issue.

      1. People complaining about the potential for fraud shows a lack of interest in combating fraud.

        That is your position. Just so we are clear.

        1. It isn't much of a thinker.

        2. You can ignore these complaints if they appear 4 weeks before the election and immediately disappear after with no steps taken to deal with them. American people and politicians are comfortable with a certain amount of corruption in the electoral process and aren't willing to remove it.

    2. We've had insiders make exposes. See, e.g., the recent Harris County vote harvesting scandal. No one of importance gives a shit.

      They will.

  34. Yes there is corruption in mail-in ballots. Show me any system, particularly a political one involving lots of power and money, that isn't corrupt.

    Voting is, has always been, and will always be a corrupt, steaming pile of shit way to make people think they matter. Wise up to it and you'll realize it doesn't really matter if you mail your ballots in or if you lop off your appropriate hand (right or left) and stuff it into a box, fingerprints and all. In fact, I'm pretty sure this is what fucking diehard partisans should have to do. At least most of them would be limited to two votes in their life.

    Your vote is bullshit, and it's inherently violent bullshit too. Candidates should be part of a lottery system, from which the winner is dispatched like Tessie Hutchinson. At least the violence would be inflicted on deserving people.

    1. BTW if you re-read the story, Mrs Hutchinson was being an annoying little snot, and there's a good possibility the fix was in.

      If there's any possibility for it, some "fix" is always in.

  35. Every month start earning more cash from $20,000 to $24,000 by working very simple j0b 0nline from home. I have earned last month $23159 from this by just doing this 0nline w0rk for maximum 3 to 4 hrs a day using my laptop. This home j0b is just awesome and regular earning from this are much times better than other regular 9 to 5 desk j0b. Now every person on this earth can get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow instructions on the given web page......Check my site.

  36. OT:
    Wife's watching one of the broadcast "news" programs:
    Snippet of Trump saying 'it's not all that bad, you can beat it'.
    Followed by aggrieved relatives of someone who died of it whining about his 'insensitivity!'
    Strange; every time some lefty celebrity who managed to get through cancer treatments and pumps their fist with encouraging words for others, they are regarded as heroic.
    Wonder if this disparity has something to do with the news organizations?

    1. They are legitimate targets.
      That includes Reason.

      1. It’s hilarious how you guys are going from the denial to the anger stage so predictably.

        1. You'd better hope for anger.
          Because cold and calculating is going to be much more efficient.

          1. Calculating like Trump’s current stimulus policy? Maybe wait till the drugs wear off?

  37. Even the New York Times had an article a few years back admitting that mail ballots are universally considered by both parties to be highly susceptible to fraud and coercion.

    That was before the entire Democratic party & their media decided to run this gaslight.

    1. "a few years back admitting that mail ballots are universally considered by both parties to be highly susceptible to fraud and coercion. "

      What has been done since then to address the problem? It's a bit rich whinging about it 4 weeks before the election after years of inaction.

      1. What are you talking about? The Democrats are the ones who, in 2020, have shoved through drastic changes to our voting systems, ostensibly due to coronavirus. Changes that they are not ready to handle, and changes made without any attendant measures to protect the security and integrity of the vote. And the right has been objecting the whole time. The Repud PA legislature, just for one example, has been trying to pass legislative measures and the Dem governor stonewalls them, while the Dem PA supreme court hands out Dem wins like parade candy.

        Democrats never saw a measure to make voting more secure they didn't hate, nor a measure that made voting looser and less secure that they didn't love.

        The impending disaster of election results that may be delayed for weeks or months, and the impending perception of an insecure and unfair elections, is exactly what is intended. At least, what Dems are doing is exactly what one who had such an intention would do.

        Just for example, take the fact that in every state, they are trying to push deadlines and time frames as late as possible. Why? Why not delay the election, then? It used to be that you had to vote by election day - that's Nov 3 this year. Now, that is supposedly unfair because what if some votes are late? But then you create new deadlines that vary by state, and doesn't the same illogic still apply to the new deadline? It's nonsense.

        1. "What are you talking about? The Democrats are the ones who, in 2020, have shoved through drastic changes to our voting systems, ostensibly due to coronavirus. Changes that they are not ready to handle, and changes made without any attendant measures to protect the security and integrity of the vote. And the right has been objecting the whole time. The Repud PA legislature, just for one example, has been trying to pass legislative measures and the Dem governor stonewalls them, while the Dem PA supreme court hands out Dem wins like parade candy."

          I agree. A fair, transparent, swiftly decided election is simply beyond the capabilities of those entrusted to carry it out and over see it. End of the empire chickens coming home to roost etc.

          Whatever the results, things are not going to improve. They will get worse in new ways. One thing that may calm things down is a decisive victory for Biden on Tuesday followed by a massive positive response on Wall Street the next day. It might restore some confidence and take the wind out of Trump's sails. The stock market seems to be the one institution Trump bows to.

  38. So I requested and received a mail-in ballot for Virginia, then decided to vote early in person. I properly surrendered my mail in ballot at the voting place before I voted, but what if I hadn’t, or said I had lost or never received it? I doubt they would have not allowed me to vote early, then I could have gone ahead and still sent in my mail-in ballot up until the Friday after Election Day. It would certainly be disputed if I voted for Trump or Biden, but since I voted for Jorgensen, it would end up in the trash and nobody would think twice about it...

    1. That’s called voter fraud and is seriously illegal. Are you moved to risk fines and jail for the prospect of giving your candidate one extra vote? Do you think many people are? And do you think the state election apparatus isn’t equipped to figure it out?

      1. Sorry Tony. I never had any intention to attempt to vote twice. My point was that it would be possible to do so, and if my ballot arrived at the very last minute amid tens of thousands of other mail in ballots election officials are not going to have the time or resources to track me down, They might see I had already voted and tossed my ballot, but if you have a bunch of partisans from the Trump/Biden campaigns watching the counting, they are going to insist that the ballot be counted for them. It’s a purely academic exercise since (1) Virginia is going to Biden anyway so I doubt they will bother to even count the mail in ballots after Election Day (2) I voted for Jo Jorgensen, so nobody would give a shit, even if the election were close here.

      2. There are a million or more deranged lunatics in this country who compare Trump to Hitler.

        You know, history has looked on those who plotted failed assassination attempts on Hitler as heroes, or at least would-be heroes.

        Voting twice certainly seems like a small act of virtue, and maybe even a patriotic duty, when it comes to stopping Nazis! Especially when there is probably a 99.99% chance you won't get caught.

        1. Put me down for being pro-law enforcement when it comes to voter fraud. Throw the book at people who do it. Any functioning system will be able to find and exclude duplicate votes. Do Republicans want to make elections more secure, or do they just want to keep muddying the waters so they can get courts to help them steal elections?

          1. Tony, you are pro democrat. Period. Everything else is a convenience to advance democrat power.

  39. So it is a conspiracy theory to worry about ballots being dumped when we have found ballots dumped into ditches, caught people paying for votes on camera, and have had multiple people arrested and charged for election fraud for the primaries. We can argue about whether it is too small to matter, but the repeated claims that it's mythological sounds very much like "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain".

    On the other hand, speculation on Trump not handing over power is considered fact, and the only supporting evidence is that he is very concerned about the voter fraud that you are denying exists.

    1. This is what they always do.
      You could have a story about voter fraud EVERY DAY, and each day the media and DNC would just continue to say "but that's just one case," and reset their counter at midnight. They claim each grain of sand isn't a pile, even as they stand next to the dune.

      Notice, no one has asked Joe Biden whether or not he'll commit to the peaceful continuation of power...

  40. It's way to premature to say "but widespread malfeasance isn't one of them". Time will tell if there is and there isn't and if there is if it's primarily the democrats, the republicans or both of them. Until this point, this is only the opinion of Eric Boehm.

    In my opinion there has been already been malfeasance in some localities, which could effect some elections. There does not need to be widespread malfeasance evenly across the country to effect an election, just enough malfeasance in selected areas could change an election.

    Personally, I don't understand the objections of having to show an Picture ID when voting in person. Likewise moving from a voting day to a voting week makes sense. I don't like the notion of eliminating the electoral college as we are a union of 50 states and a single entity.

  41. The Public Interest Legal Foundation did a study of voter fraud and what they found is interesting. The foundation discovered more than 140,000 instances of potential election fraud in the 2016 and 2018 elections, ranging from individuals illegally voting in multiple states to someone voting in the name of a deceased person. There are currently 349,773 deceased registrants on the voter rolls in 41 states. Even worse, state records show that 7,890 of these deceased voters cast ballots from the grave in the 2016 presidential election and 6,718 did so in the 2018 congressional elections. 8,360 individuals registered and voted in two different states during the 2018 election. They also found
    — 43,760 individuals were registered more than once at the same address and cast second votes in the 2016 election, while 37,889 individuals appeared to have voted twice from the same registration address in 2018. (Thousands of these apparent double votes were exclusively mail-in ballots.) — 5,500 voters cast ballots twice in the same state from two different registration addresses in 2018.
    — 34,000 voters appeared to have used nonresidential, commercial addresses—such as gas stations, casinos, and restaurants—to register to vote.
    This is why Democrats sue states that attempt to purge their voter rolls.

    1. Would like to see the study. Do you have a link?

    2. PILF is a Republican-affiliated outfit whose mission is to purge voter rolls and has been repeatedly found to have made false claims and used phony stats.

      1. They sure do Tony! We believe you!

      2. PILF is a Republican-affiliated outfit whose mission is to purge voter rolls

        Good! Voter rolls should be purged of invalid registrations. There are far too many of them.

  42. “'Is that from the dex?' I asked.

    'Yeah,' he said.

    ...so volatile that Washington’s Adult Protective Services agency appointed someone to take care of him for a year. Clinical depression set in; acne covered his entire body. Washing the sores was too painful. 'There was a month when I literally did not bathe once,' he said.

    His doctors put him on 10 milligrams of Xanax per day, essentially turning him into a zombie. Even when he could function, panic attacks paralyzed him. Getting off dex, he said, 'was like sticking my finger in an electric socket. My whole nervous system was fried.'"


    Colloquially insane, from the start, Trump is made clinically insane by his C-19 over-medication. The 25th Amendment is past due!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.