A funny thing happened on the way to the coronation...

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by CheekyBird

I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about the 19 votes that could have swung the election for Hillary Clinton. Pardon me.

So, we shouldn't do anything about it, and then enable many hundreds of people to do the same thing, so that eventually we'd have 10,000 dead people registered?? At what point should we get concerned?

And would you assert that assessing right and wrong on a statistical count is somehow enlightened? What happened to the rationale of "one death is too many"? Or does that sort of logic just apply to the clubbing of baby seals and the like (exempting of course abortion which is just dandy)?

The workings of the liberal mind are as sickening as they are convoluted.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

So, we shouldn't do anything about it, and then enable many hundreds of people to do the same thing, so that eventually we'd have 10,000 dead people registered?? At what point should we get concerned?

And would you assert that assessing right and wrong on a statistical count is somehow enlightened? What happened to the rationale of "one death is too many"? Or does that sort of logic just apply to the clubbing of baby seals and the like (exempting of course abortion which is just dandy)?

The workings of the liberal mind are as sickening as they are convoluted.

Joey do you think only one party is doing this? Just curious

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

Joey do you think only one party is doing this? Just curious

No, Jim, I wouldn't assert that at all. If I had my way there would be no voter fraud at all, and I am sure many agree. There is a vast difference between being disappointed in the outcome of an election, but knowing the will of the people was served, versus having fraud distort the results.

No system is perfect, and political people of either (or any) stripe will always scheme.

I just would not give up and rely on "whew... I guess nobody cheated enough to swing the election..."

We need actual ID, automation, and verifiable equipment. In 2016, with the computers we have, it is inexcusable for dead people, or illegal aliens, or convicted felons, to be able to vote, and for anybody to be able to vote more than once.

This is a crime that we are allowing to continue. It could be 99% wiped out if there was political will to do so.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

No, Jim, I wouldn't assert that at all. If I had my way there would be no voter fraud at all, and I am sure many agree. There is a vast difference between being disappointed in the outcome of an election, but knowing the will of the people was served, versus having fraud distort the results.

No system is perfect, and political people of either (or any) stripe will always scheme.

I just would not give up and rely on "whew... I guess nobody cheated enough to swing the election..."

We need actual ID, automation, and verifiable equipment. In 2016, with the computers we have, it is inexcusable for dead people, or illegal aliens, or convicted felons, to be able to vote, and for anybody to be able to vote more than once.

This is a crime that we are allowing to continue. It could be 99% wiped out if there was political will to do so.

Agree 100%

[CheekyBird]

Originally Posted by joeydb

No system is perfect, and political people of either (or any) stripe will always scheme.

This is precisely my point.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by CheekyBird

This is precisely my point.

With regard to your question as to whether voter fraud could actually sway the election, it could very conceivably sway a close election. How could this happen? Very easily. What if it comes down to 1 or 2 states that are very close. Let's say that Trump ends up winning most of the states that he needs to like Florida, Ohio, etc. That would make it a very close election. Then if Hillary ends up winning a state like Virginia or Pennsylvania by just 2,000 votes or something like that (and there was a lot of fraud in one of those states), that could make the difference in the election.

There are plenty of states where there are well over 100,000 illegal aliens. If you have a state where there are 100,000 illegal aliens, that would mean you could expect around 5,000 of them to vote, if the estimates are right. Illegal aliens typically vote around 80% democrat and 20% republican. So those 5,000 illegal votes would net the democrat 3,000 votes (the democrat would get 4,000 and the republican would get 1,000). What if Hillary wins one of those states such as Pennsylvania, Minnesota or Virginia by only 2,000 votes? That alone could conceivably win her the election.

[Pants II]

They are shredding at world record pace.

Deleting, shredding, smashing, etc.

[Pants II]

Check the breaking news for voter fraud. It's happening, folks.

[Pants II]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/po...ion_fraud.html

"Earn up to $130 working the polls on election day"

[Rudeboyelvis]

Weird. As of today, POTUS, FLOTUS, and Fauxcahontas (both personal and Senate accts) have all unfollowed @HillaryClinton on Twitter.