Bowsite.com

Post any shenanigans you see going on here so we can all see and spread awareness

Terry

As many as the dems can register. Or not resister......if they can "harvest" their ballots.

Has there been a single election that mail-in fraud was PROVEN to have changed the election results?

lol a secret voter integrity organization that no one has ever heard of that hasn’t shared any information. Got it.

I think you were the only one who said that, CaptMike. Are you an ignorant commie?

If election fraud is so easy and rampant, do you honestly think only one side would be doing it? If your candidates win, will it be because it was a fair election, or your side cheated better than the other side? Those are rhetorical questions, BTW.

Literally no one is saying that. What people are saying is that it is taken very seriously, which is why we have incredibly low instances of voter fraud. Anybody saying otherwise is completely ignoring the facts as it pertains to election security.

Your math ain’t mathing, LeeBuzz. There are more than 156 million individuals eligible to vote in this country. In 2020 there were almost 170 million registered voters.

And the Twitter account MSM Fact Checking posted a similar claim on Dec. 18, 2020 from which many viral Facebook posts stem. "Just to clarify there were 213,799,485 registered voters in 2020 of which conflicting sources say turnout was between 60% - 65%. I averaged it out at 62.5% which means just over 133,500,000 registered voters voted. 74,000,000 Trump + 81,000,000 Biden = 155,000,000."

We are talking about the 2020 election consensus of legally registered voter turnout. Not about the roughly 159 million ballots that were counted.

Well, not sure where those numbers are coming from, as there have never been 214 million registered voters. The article you posted sets it straight, though registered voter counts weren't available for the 2020 election when it was written (we now have those numbers).

There are ~240 million people eligible to vote in this country. Roughly 170 million of them registered to vote in 2020. Of the ~170 million people that registered, ~160 million actually cast ballots.

19 illegal voters were caught and indicted in NC in 2018, and that's your proof that voter fraud is rampant and destroying our electoral system? Umm....OK.

"The database includes only 41 cases involving non-citizens registering, voting, or attempting to vote. This is particularly striking given the claims made by President Trump in setting up the Commission that millions of illegal votes were cast in 2016; on other occasions, he said 3 to 5 million unauthorized immigrants robbed him of the popular vote majority. The fact that only 41 such cases were identified over a time span of more than four decades highlights the absurdity of claims that millions of non-citizens voted in the 2016 election alone."

The database covers a period of elections encompassing literally billions of votes, and there have been just 1,500 identified instances of fraud of all types, and only a tiny fraction of fraud involves non-citizens attempting to vote.

JayG is really working hard to take the conspiracy theory title from spike.

Throughout the history of men people have cheated to gain better food, guns, seats at a concert, etc…, The fact you so naively believe that doesn’t apply here is laughable.

The government can’t deliver mail correctly. Much less direct elections in 50 states that do it their own way. It would take an absolute moron to suggest we have a hold on anything from a federal government perspective. Much less ensuring the states are handling the unptenth ways a person can vote.

I'm all for it. Even Trump is now calling for it. Swamp the Vote. Link: "Hear From President Trump Why Voting Before Election Day is Critical in 2024."

"Much less ensuring the states are handling the unptenth ways a person can vote."

Agree to disagree. Not saying vote fraud won't happen - detected or undetected - but there are a multitude of safeguards in place to ensure only legal votes are counted. Voter rolls, election canvassing, election certification all involve multiple checks to ensure elections are secure. And the data suggests that our elections are extraordinarily secure. Not saying we shouldn't aim to do more, but it's always a tradeoff in terms of how much more return we get from the investment.

Freedom has responsibilities. It’s a simple concept. Show up in person or don’t vote. Service members aside.

Saying any different would be like saying it’s ok to start elk season earlier than everyone else. Because you have a moose hunt planned. It’s no different. That wouldn’t fly in anyone’s book. Why it’s not transferred to the defining example of the republics choice on elections is mind boggling.

Or...you know...vote by mail. It's the way things are going, it's Constitutional, and I have zero problem with it. It makes it easier for those that are impacted by health, geography, or other commitments to ensure their voice is heard. Personally, I think we should make it easier for everyone that can vote to vote as long as it is secure. And it's been proven that mail-in voting is highly secure.

"Saying any different would be like saying it’s ok to start elk season earlier than everyone else. Because you have a moose hunt planned"

It's nothing like that at all. Hunting earlier than everyone else provides a competitive advantage. You get no competitive advantage from voting early.

Absolutely an untrue statement Huge advantage at certain times in the race. Kamala would love to have the first debate on the Monday before the polls open on Tuesday.

Securing American fundamentals may not be high on your list. It is mine and there’s only one way to ensure we are doing the best job possible concerning voting. Not mail in ballots. Not voting early because it interferes with your vacation. In person voting. It’s a simple concept.

Life is full of inconveniences for me that fit others just fine. I can either adapt to it or scream about it getting in the way of my tee time. All those people can get to the grocery store, the gas pump, in line to watch a sporting event. Etc…. They can get inline and vote too.

"Four counties in Arizona have more registered voters than total voting-age citizens, the group’s suit says — Apache, La Paz, Navajo and Santa Cruz. The suit uses 2022 voter registration figures and data from the U.S. Census Bureau."

"How Americans Have Voted Through History: From Voices to Screens"

"From shouting candidate's names, to hanging chads, to electronic scanning, the nature of voting has a long, sometimes bumpy history in the United States."

I'm sure every time a new system was implemented, there were some folks who screamed the old system was more secure. Perhaps the most secure system was the first 50-year system, when only white men could vote, and they did it by voice after being sworn in by a judge.

I don’t know what “American fundamentals” mean. But as GG pointed out, showing up with an ID to vote was never ever something the founding fathers could have dreamed of or intended.

The right to vote is, indeed, instrumental to the functioning of our republic. As I said before, we should endeavor to facilitate the process for every legal voter as long as we do so in a secure way. Nice to see the Republican Party finally embrace that logic as well.

But your analogy about traffic laws is a good one. We could certainly pass stricter traffic laws in an effort to make our roads even safer. But at some point the benefits aren’t worth the cost (be it of inconvenience, enforcement, etc). That’s the same as voting laws in this country. We have extraordinarily secure elections. Voting by mail by every measure is also incredibly secure. There is no data to suggest we need to scrap the system - in fact, the data suggests the contrary.

while voting is a right...i also believe it is a responsibility that requires at least some effort on the part of each voter. i want to know that each voter thinks enough about the process...and feels it is important enough to at least request a ballot...and prove citizenship to get it.

"How Americans Have Voted Through History: From Voices to Screens"

"From shouting candidate's names, to hanging chads, to electronic scanning, the nature of voting has a long, sometimes bumpy history in the United States."

I'm sure every time a new system was implemented, there were some folks who screamed the old system was more secure. Perhaps the most secure system was the first 50-year system, when only white men could vote, and they did it by voice after being sworn in by a judge.

Argue or discuss it however you’d like. That’s just the way it is.

Fully agree, WVM. That’s why I’m against laws that would disenfranchise thousands (or even millions based on some sources) of voters in order to prevent a few dozen people from attempting to vote illegally. It’s a moderately effective solution for what is essentially a non-existent problem and until someone provides proof that there is much more fraud than that I won’t feel differently.

And I can show you 100 million men who want to date Megan Fox. Doesn’t mean it’s going to happen.

Every breath taken by those that opposed Trump, from 2016-2020, was expelled in a lie. The biggest sham in our life times no doubt. The steal started the day he was inaugurated. And continues as we speak. Yet you trust the same sources to tell you about election fraud and regurgitate it like the gospel.

I’m still pretty young at 50 but, I wasn’t born yesterday. I’ll take history of human nature and the deceitful coup attempt for face value. Instead of what others claim.

It takes an immigrant a long time to earn their citizenship here. The dems aren’t waiting on that. You can take it too the bank they aren’t passing that opportunity up after they’ve showcased the lengths they are willing to go in order to beat Trump. Human nature says I’m right. It never has or never will change either. It’d be naive to suggest it doesn’t apply. We all know better.

thats doubtful. lol

That's what the documented data shows (again, see the Heritage Foundation database linked above). Now the documented data is on known cases of voter fraud, and no doubt there are instances of fraud that never go detected, but I've seen nothing to suggest that the number is anywhere near the millions that people have suggested.

This database covers all types of fraud. When you look at ineligible voting, that is only a fraction of the cases; and only a fraction of that involves non-citizens. Furthermore, only a fraction of those instances would be prevented by having an ID requirement (as plenty of non-citizens still can obtain government issued ID).

Again, the Brennan Center filtered through all of the Heritage Foundation's data on voter fraud (this was done ahead of the 2020 election). Here is what the data showed:

"- In reviewing decades of cases and billions of votes cast, the Heritage Foundation has identified just 10 cases involving in-person impersonation fraud at the polls (fewer than the number of members on the President’s Commission). Heritage thus confirms what extensive prior research has shown — it is more likely that an individual will be struck by lightning than impersonate another voter at the polls.

- The database includes only 41 cases involving non-citizens registering, voting, or attempting to vote. This is particularly striking given the claims made by President Trump in setting up the Commission that millions of illegal votes were cast in 2016; on other occasions, he said 3 to 5 million unauthorized immigrants robbed him of the popular vote majority. The fact that only 41 such cases were identified over a time span of more than four decades highlights the absurdity of claims that millions of non-citizens voted in the 2016 election alone.

-The 51 cases referenced in the two previous bullets are the only examples in the database that would be addressed by the reforms most often trumpeted by the Heritage Foundation — laws requiring documentary proof of citizenship or government-issued identification to vote. It underscores that the potential harm from such proposals greatly outweighs any potential benefit."

We were told eight years ago by Steven Miller and Trump they were going to share the evidence of all these illegal votes. It's no surprise they haven't done so. Because there is no such evidence.

There are other checks and balances to ensure the ballots come from a legal voter and that voter is who they say they are. The fact of that matter is that those barriers are highly effective at discouraging and detecting fraud. The overwhelming majority of people (roughly 99.9997% of voters per the data) do not want to risk the consequences that come with casting a vote fraudulently. That especially holds true for non-citizens in this country who risk losing their livelihoods (whether they are here legally or not).

BEG, the earth is flat. There used to be documentation for that too.

BEG, the earth is flat. There used to be documentation for that too.

One thing I've learned about politics is only the losers whine about massive voter fraud, without any proof, of course. And it goes both ways. Always has and always will, I suppose.

Not being a wise guy. I’m not saying anything bad. What I am saying is this is the most important task a citizen has. Yet, we treat it as an option against everything else in life. As citizens of the US, we are charged with responsibilities. It’s how we prioritize those that decides we need 17 different ways of voting to appease everyone.

I can’t say anymore. You guys have a good one.

I don’t know if I’d call it the “most important,” but I completely agree that it is one of the most important duties of a citizen in this country - which is exactly why I think we should be making it easier for people to securely vote, not harder.

Everyone has time to do all sorts of things. Except stand in line accountable, to vote.

I don’t know if I’d call it the “most important,” but I completely agree that it is one of the most important duties of a citizen in this country - which is exactly why I think we should be making it easier for people to securely vote, not harder.

Perhaps all the states can change there policies on mail in votes since YOU don't care for them... Justin you might be a heck of an outdoorsman but some of your political views I sure wonder about. Any way good luck to you.

I think you misunderstood me. I said the *whining* about massive voter fraud is real and it goes both ways depending on who loses. Yet, neither side can ever prove it. Perhaps that's because it doesn't exist to the extent they claim?

And, again, I'll ask anyone who is willing to answer:

If your candidates win, will it mean it was a fair election without any significant fraud, or will it mean your team learned to cheat as well as the other team?

I won’t get into Joes guilt or innocence either but the Hunter Biden lap tap story was real and it was suppressed by the main stream media and social media.

There is a supposed pole stating that 17% of Biden voters wouldn’t have voted for him if they knew about the laptop. Well I am not sold on the 17% but let’s say it’s 3% and in some of these key states it only has to be 1% to change that election.

Controlling the information flow is very powerful in a country that is supposed to have free speech.

Based on what? States require some level of identification to register to vote for the first time, and this can be accomplished without a photo-ID (like providing a SSN). Illegals generally have neither of those.

"Come on man surely you don't think a government ID is going to keep a legal citizen from voting do you?"

It is fairly well documented that it does have an impact, particularly among low-income voters.

.0003% doesn't sound massive to me

"the voting machines not working in Republican section of AZ"

First I'm hearing of this. Link?

"stuffing of ballot boxes all over the nation. (See 2000 mules)"

There has been zero evidence of this. "Stuffing a ballot box" means that a voter needed to be registered, someone needed to impersonate that registered voter, make sure that registered voter doesn't also vote, and then hope that all the other security measures that go with canvassing the vote fail (such as signature matching, double voting, etc). No one has provided any evidence that this happened or any insight into how all of this was successfully done if it wasn't detected.

Regarding 2,000 Mules (which has already been widely debunked), there's a reason it has been pulled from all platforms and the publishers have issued an apology. It's nice to see you can't falsely accuse people of things and get away with it.

So you're left with "truth suppression" and "censoring on social media" and "lopsided reporting of the mainstream media." I find that particularly funny given that the most popular mainstream media outlet is Fox News.

The fact of the matter is people don't need the filter of the media. You can listen and see Trump for yourself, and that is what most people have formed their opinions on. It is also why he will struggle to win this upcoming election as well.

JayG, I don't think I ever mentioned the Brennan Center. Try to keep up.

"Are you two commies, anti-Americans or idiots? One is not worried about voter fraud if it is not in large numbers and the other just does not care about a fair election as he wants it as easy as possible. Laughable if they were not such terrible citizens."

I had earlier explained why I and numerous others rely on mail in voting ballots. Since you choose not address these two individuals by name and you commenting that one did care about a fair election and wants it as easy a possible. Because of that I felt you were addressing me. I would almost feel bad if it wasn't for the fact that a grown man (you) wants to call good decent men on this site commies and anti- Americans because you have different opinions.I equate this to liberals calling police officers and Republicans Nazis. Pretty childish wouldn't you agree?

"I guess you think every student away at college shouldn't vote if away at school? Men or women who are away from home on business or at work? Somebody in the hospital or bedridden? What about Americans living abroad for a period of time?

Gentlemen, there are plenty of reasons why someone may need to mail in their ballot. For 15 years I worked out of town and rented a home 100 miles from my place in Southern Okla. There's no way I could make every local, state, or federal election on those second Tuesdays. School board, county commissioner, or presidential elections they're all important to me. The election board would send a ballot maybe two weeks in advance and I would vote on my candidate or issue, have my ballot notarized and get it back as soon as possible. The right to vote is precious just like the second amendment. If there's corruption at the precinct level that's another issue.

To all whom I’ve opposed on this topic, I was wrong. I stand corrected.

Anyhow, guys, I am not a hardcore Trump or a never Trump guy. I just believe in being fair. If the people want to vote in friggen spongebob, as long as the election is true and honest, then the people will get the government the deserve,,,, but this shit?? The corruption was on video... Election workers putting boards and blocking the windows so that the Republicans election workers couldn't observe the counting, which is mandatory under the law?? WTF, and if anyone can say that this last election was on the up and up, please put the crack pipe down and report to rehab immediately...

In certifying the results without the investigation, that actually violates the politicians oath of office, to support and defend the Constitution. Because they failed to do their job, technically, all who voted to certify should be terminated from their positions.

There actually was a lawsuit, Brunson v Adams that you aught to take a look at. I have heard some interesting things about that recently.

That is not the right question. The right question is what steps can be taken to guarantee the authenticity of the vote count and of the voting. Waiting until a fraud has been done and succeeded results in more fraud, as the fraudsters will be in office. There was a story today about 300 people wrongly added to the voter lists when they got driver's licenses.

My ex-wife, a homecare nurse, had a family fill out the ballot for their elderly mother, who had Alzheimer's and was totally out of it. She physically saw it happen. That cannot be the only case.

No, I don't KNOW that. I do KNOW that over 60 lawsuits were filed claiming voter fraud. Some of those cases were reviewed by judges that Trump, or other republican presidents, appointed. None of those cases were proven. Zero.

Now, you can believe that every one of those judges were "crooks" if you choose to. And you can believe the whole election was some grand conspiracy involving election officials and judicial systems from multiple states, but I find that idiotic. If that were the case, how did the red team win a majority in the House in the 2022 midterm election? Was that a fair election, or did the red team learn to cheat too?

Nobody said any different. I posted the link to the Heritage Foundation database multiple times. Numerous people are convicted of voter fraud every election. It generally amounts to ~.0003% of all votes cast. Essentially three of every million votes cast is fraudulent.

It’s not a joke or a non issue. Judges weren’t hearing cases on voter fraud. They were cases filed due to the holes in state laws that made their system ripe for fraud.

The fact is we will never know the real truth. Because by and large, most of those cases weren’t tried. So, We don’t know one single thing except the last presidential election was unique. By design.

Admitting that is the first step in understanding why so many people are pissed the way it happened. Videos of workers recounting ballots, auditors being thrown out, precincts reporting when counting was supposed to stop for the night, etc….

But, the biggest thing most people can’t get over is a guy who can’t complete a sentence, beat the most popular president in history.

Trump received more votes than any other presidential candidate in history. And, is still a favored in poles as we speak. But, he somehow lost to a guy who’d run twice before and never garnered enough attention to consider legitimate. The same guy who was humiliated out of a previous run, due to being caught lying. This guy beat what poles say is still americas preferred choice? The geriatric that couldn’t leave his basement to campaign for fear of exposing himself for the woes that plagued his time as acting president.

Come on man. It’d take a real don’t give a shit approach to insist things are peachy. And, it appears several pivotal states in last election agrees.

I was wrong earlier on such a black and white outlook on this subject. That doesn’t change reality that obviously there are many people in places to know, that don’t agree it’s a non issue. Or so small it’s irrelevant.

Absentee voting is ripe for fraud. Some states have passed laws to further prosecute pole workers for committing fraud as well. Once again, I’m certain there’s reasons for that.

This is a serious issue that needs addressed. And, the more the msm fights and ridicules people for insisting we solidify our voting procedures, the more certain it’s the right thing to do.

You swap the players around and it’d be a different story from the lapdog journalists that make up much of the msm.

WV. your post is spot on at a lot of levels. Good one !!

My point is a guy better educated yourself with truth because a lot of these so called hunters and outdoorsman aren’t even close to what the truth is. They are brainwashed, uneducated, ungodly creatures of habit. You know those kinda people who are easily manipulated and lead to slaughter.

God bless all my fellow Christian hunters out there.

Shane

Based on what? Because it seems to based on a complete lack of knowledge of the security measures in place that make it extraordinarily difficult to perpetrate voter as an absentee voter. It is pure speculation and conjecture as there is no evidence whatsoever to back up the notion that “absentee voting is ripe for fraud.”

“Try Newsmax or Victory news”

The same Newsmax who is literally being sued for false claims of voter fraud? The Newsmax who had to withdraw stories and issue apologies over their claims of voter fraud already?

Shane

Probably, Hillary was pissed that they didn't cheat enough to put her in the white house. They believed their own false information that she was ahead in the polls further than she really was.

https://www.npr.org/2021/04/30/992534968/newsmax-issues-retraction-and-apology-to-dominion-employee-over-election-stories

"Newsmax subsequently found no evidence that such allegations were true. Many of the states whose results were contested by the Trump campaign after the November 2020 election have conducted extensive recounts and audits, and each of these states certified the results as legal and final," the company said in a statement published online that will also be broadcast.“

These same states that wouldn’t hear the lawsuits say there’s nothing see here. Have you stopped to think what would have happened if those lawsuits were tried? The implications?

Who’s going to be the judge responsible for holding up national election results Because of their state’s election laws? Which judge was going to set a precedent for a federal Supreme Court case questioning untold previous elections? What impact would that have on markets worldwide? Civil unrest pending. Kamala even reaffirmed that. Etc….

You guys can go on with the it’s no big deal. But, everything except brow beaten journalists and their lapdogs believe otherwise. To me, that would be something to pause and think about. Especially with what we’ve seen over the last 8 years.

Call me simple. I’ll take it. Because simple works best for the greater good.

Never understood this logic. They weren’t tried for a reason. If there was any evidence of what you all suggest happened, they would have gone to trial.

“You guys can go on with the it’s no big deal. But, everything except brow beaten journalists and their lapdogs believe otherwise”

What is no big deal?? Voter fraud is a big deal. There’s a reason we put the security measures in place that we do, security measures that have proven to be highly effective. And no, one doesn’t need to look to journalists to come to that conclusion. Plenty of independent think tanks and even studies sponsored by the GOP that have come to the same conclusion.

But, like half of America, ask them if it’s important for Trump and you find reasons not to ensure it involving 2020 elections.

There you go folks. Jason said it so it has to be true. Nothing to see here. Let’s repeat 2020 again.

That’s the plan I’m Certain. The only thing I can’t get my ahead around is why don’t we get it right. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck…. It’s a duck until proven otherwise. Why that doesn’t apply with voting integrity is beyond me. I’m just glad beg knows better. I’ll sleep good tonight.

I’m betting I’m not the first, only, or the minority when I say I could tell there’s a lot you don’t seem to understand.

I don’t hear anyone saying it doesn’t apply.

“The only thing I can’t get my ahead around is why don’t we get it right.”

And that’s where we differ. .0003% voter fraud rate is getting it right IMO.

And regarding your link BowSniper, being registered and actually voting are two different things, this sums it all up:

“Oregon has allowed noncitizens to obtain diver’s licenses since 2019. Of the 306 people identified, just two have cast ballots in an election since 2021.”

They shouldn’t have been registered in the first place. The error was caught. It’s being fixed. In all that time this error resulted in two votes being cast.

I noticed no one really wants to answer those questions. In case it's not obvious, my point is, it's disingenuous to claim massive voter fraud ONLY in the elections your team loses, but not in the elections your team wins. Either there's massive voter fraud in all elections, which makes NONE of them legit, or there isn't. Which one is it?

Isn't it amazing how there's massive voter fraud, but no one can prove it? Either the blue team is some really good cheaters, or the red team is dumb as dirt and can't catch them.

I can lay my head down at night knowing I raised three great kids to be Lions and upright citizens of this great country. Unlike some of these Sheep raised people on this site.

Best thing of all is my family and I know who wins in the end. It won’t be some political party or politician. JESUS will get the victory and we’re all in for him. We just have to deal with all this mess getting there.

Shane

Over 200 judges, from both sides of the political spectrum, reviewed Trump's voter fraud lawsuits. Some of the judges were appointed by Trump himself. Most of the cases were dismissed or dropped due to lack of evidence, or standing. Not a single case was proven. Are you saying all of those judges conspired to cover up massive voter fraud against Trump? That's a bold claim to make without any proof. So, exactly who is claiming his opinions are facts?

It’s quite alarming that anyone really thinks “no one wanted to prove fraud” or that “no one looked into it.” The opportunity to win a case like that would be a career maker for anyone involved. It’s not that no one tried. Loads of people tried. In many ways. From Trump’s election integrity commission in 2016 to multiple investigations in the 2020 election. There’s a reason you don’t hear about all the evidence they uncovered - it’s because there is none.

If you think Democrats letting 10 million illegals into the country wasn't for the ultimate goal of slipping enough onto voter rolls to steal the election (again) YOU are a useful idiot.

Shane

Umm....yes he did.

Not true; what is true is that an election can be called if the candidate in the lead has more votes than the remaining uncounted absentee ballots. Regardless of the outcome being decided ALL absentee ballots are counted and added to the final tally for their respective candidate choices.

At this rate we're going to give Fakebook (er, Facebook) a run for their money for inaccuracies....

Again, all part of our election security protocols. As has been shown with the data from Oregon released recently and from other states where this is done, these mistakes rarely result in people actually voting.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLLLL

Again, just as in Oregon, and Virginia, and other places where data on non-citizen voting has been made available recently, somewhere in the order of 1% of those 6,300 likely cast votes. So call it 63 votes out of 11 million votes cast - or about .0006% of the votes in the largest immigrant state in the country likely came from non-citizens.

Hmmmmmm. Imagine that. The same party that created widespread vote by mail, and voted against requiring proof of citizenship to vote, insists there is no proof of widespread voter fraud (meaning they just haven't been caught yet)

But it's already too late, really. There have been too many allegations, too many "mistakes", too many assassination attempts. No one trusts the system anymore. The Union is broken.... and you live here too. Welcome to Venezuela!

OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) – Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt alongside state election officials announced on Wednesday, the removal of over 453,500 voter registrations.

Since January 1, 2021 officials say, Oklahoma election officials have removed 97,065 deceased voters, 143,682 voters who moved out-of-state, 5,607 felons, 14,993 duplicate registrations, and 194,962 inactive voters who were canceled during the address verification process.

Also Oklahoma voter ID laws require proof of identity for every voter, regardless of whether you’re voting early, absentee, or in-person. Only United States citizens who are residents of Oklahoma may register to vote and state law explicitly prohibits noncitizens from accessing voter registration services.

Our state shows that with the right safeguards early voting and mail-in/absentee voting can be done successfully. How do I know this, in the last three Presidential elections each one of our 77 counties have voted red.

Oregon found 300 non-citizens registered to vote. Of those 300 non-citizens who were registered, only 2 actually voted. Given that greater than 99% of the non-citizens who could have voted in the last election didn’t, is it more likely they were registered by a “mistake” or because of “malicious intent?” What is laughable is anyone who actually thinks it’s the latter.

“Right now, there are 5 states that if the election was today, the laws and voter rolls are such a way that the states legislatures would not be able to certify their election results”

This is nonsense.

“Also Oklahoma voter ID laws require proof of identity for every voter, regardless of whether you’re voting early, absentee, or in-person. Only United States citizens who are residents of Oklahoma may register to vote and state law explicitly prohibits noncitizens from accessing voter registration services.”

You can replace “Oklahoma” with the name of amy other state in this country and the same holds true.

You’re changing your words. You said, “Oklahoma voter ID laws require proof of identity require proof of identity for every voter, regardless of whether you’re voting early, absentee, or in-person.”

To me the term voter refers to someone who has the right to show up to a poll and vote. To do that, you need to be registered. Every state requires proof of identity to register to vote and/or to cast a vote. In many states “proof of identity” does not require a photo ID, including Oklahoma.

Now your sentence is “there are 24 states that don't even require IDs to vote.” Maybe you want to be a bit clearer on what you mean by the phrase “IDs to vote.” Because those 24 states you’re referencing may not require identification at the polls, but they do require identification to register.

My guess is your definition and my definition of “LOTS” is going to be very different. And when that happens, a voter still gets to cast a provisional ballot and ultimately there is a decision as to which of the two votes should count. This thing that you think is happening, isn’t happening.

With your way of thinking Sir, I guess there would never be a chance for any voter misconduct? Voting is a right just like firearm ownership but fortunately or unfortunately there are guidelines that help prevent those rights from being abused.

Your liberal views over the years have never bothered me because I think you're a good guy. Your fishing stories make you seem like a regular Joe. You don't call others sophomoric names like one of the immature men here on BS. You do though transform into this Social Warrior when certain topics are brought up. I'm sure you have your reasons.

True; some states do not start counting absentee ballots until after the polls close on Election day while others may count theirs well in advance of election day.

"Does not mean it will ever be tallied. Its processed as a ballot but never is tallied if it cant change the outcome."

No, and I pointed this out earlier as an inaccurate statement. States may call a winner in an election if the candidate who is ahead is ahead by more votes than all remaining absentee or mail-in votes but all votes are counted and included in the final respective tallies.

On the plus side a mistake isn't on the same level as those who despite countless reiterations by posters of them not being ok with any voter fraud having their valid points about it not being anywhere near the level some seem to think it exists at responded to with "so you think voter fraud is ok?"

If there were such a thing as an obtuse meter some would be blowing up daily around here......

If Trump doesn't win, we'll show and tell of these things as they happen. As in; Election interference, denying poll watcher activity, vote machine tempering, printer malfunctions against one candidate, truckload ballot rigging, intimidation tactics, Etc... Or there is a successful assassination attempt by a known poor sportsmanship type.

I’ll stand by what I said. Every voter is required to provide proof of identity in every state. And frankly I see no difference if you need to prove who you are when you register or when you show up at the polls. Even states that don’t require identification at the polls still require you to provide information that ensures you are who you say you are when you cast your vote, such as your signature.

“With your way of thinking Sir, I guess there would never be a chance for any voter misconduct?”

There’s always a chance of it Canepole. The data shows that the measures we have to prevent it and to detect it are very effective. And frankly, I’m against placing the burden of verification on citizens; with the information available it should be the burden of the government to do that. I’m not for measures that will disenfranchise or disincentivize individuals to vote at the expense of trying to better prevent the minuscule percentage of voter fraud that we do have. All the data we have shows over fraud is essentially a non-issue that became an issue because Trump’s ego couldn’t stand the thought of losing the popular vote to HRC.

Do you provide an ID to purchase a firearm? The 2nd amendment is a right but showing an ID when making a purchase is a "safeguard". Making a transaction at your bank, getting a drivers license, and starting a new job might not be a guarantee right(s) but there's are COMMON SENSE reasons for providing proof of identification when doing any of these.

No one here is trying to deny anyone the precious right to vote. But it's insane that you think anyone, anywhere should be able to walk into a polling place and just give a name and be expected to vote. It doesn't matter if it's the most conservative area in the state or a liberal neighborhood.

If you want a good summary of how I feel about the latest voter security measures, this is a good read. Here’s the five point summary:

- Citizenship is already a requirement to vote, but it is not always the easiest thing to prove.

- The SAVE Act needs more time and resources to be implemented well.

- There are better ways–like REAL ID and data sharing–to improve voter list accuracy.

- The federal government should expand state access to federal eligibility data.

- State legislatures are making progress on citizenship and list maintenance.

Again, many of the issues above highlight how extra security could be provided by improving information availability and sharing without additional burdens being placed on voters.

“Do you provide an ID to purchase a firearm?”

I do. Yet you were holding up Oklahoma’s voter laws as a standard and you in Oklahoma you aren’t required to provide a photo ID to cast a vote there.

“No one here is trying to deny anyone the precious right to vote”

Yet, that’s the effect some of these laws have.

“But it's insane that you think anyone, anywhere should be able to walk into a polling place and just give a name and be expected to vote”

That’s not at all what I think. And in no state is it that simple.

“just one time in all of our history that the vote count was stopped in the middle of the night! Not to mention one candidate was far ahead beforehand & far behind when they "resumed counting"?”

Again, it’s posts like this that show just how clueless people are about the vote canvassing process.

Arizona sued because they allow anyone to vote- over 47,000 voters that they know of but its hard to find them all because the liberal Dems running the show in Az refuse to conform to judgements against them and withhold voter info.

Software experts finding the algio in voting machine is rigged.

When elections are illegitimate, the whole system is crap- and that’s what we have with the Democrats in charge. Own it.

“COUNTY ELECTION BOARD VOTER IDENTIFICATION CARD

In addition, voters may use the free voter identification card they received by mail from the County Election Board when they registered to vote. The law allows use of the voter identification card even though it does not include a photograph.

AFFIDAVIT WITH PROVISIONAL BALLOT

If you do not have or if you refuse to show proof of identity, you may vote by provisional ballot and prove your identity by signing a sworn affidavit.

Provisional ballots are sealed inside special envelopes and are not put through the voting device. After election day, County Election Board officials will investigate the information provided by the voter on the affidavit and either will approve the provisional ballot for counting or will reject it based on the outcome of that investigation.

A provisional ballot cast by a voter who declines or is unable to produce proof of identity shall only be considered verified and approved for counting if:

- The voter's name on the affidavit substantially conforms to the voter's name in the voter registration database.

- The voter's residence address on the affidavit substantially conforms to the voter's residence address in the voter registration database.

- The voter's date of birth matches the information in the voter registration database.

- The voter's Oklahoma driver license number or the last four digits of the voter's Social Security number on the affidavit matches the information in the voter registration database. (This provision does not apply if the voter was not required to provide a driver license number or the last four digits of the voter's Social Security number at the time of registration.)

The provisional ballot meets the eligibility requirements set forth in Section 7-116.1 of Title 26 of the Oklahoma Statues.

Software experts finding the algio in voting machine is rigged.”

The is completely made up info.

And there’s roughly 32,000 voters who have done so (ie, registered as federal only voters). They are largely concentrated in areas of college campuses and homeless shelters.

“In pushing for stricter laws, Republican lawmakers have said the federal-only list potentially allows non-citizens to vote illegally. But an analysis of the roughly 32,000 voters on the federal-only list, and where they live, found that federal-only voters in the state are concentrated in areas where residents are simply unlikely to have easy access to documents proving their citizenship, such as college campuses and a Phoenix homeless shelter.”

You were fooled by the confusing regs in AZ...and now it's proven they have illegals on their voter roles....do some research dude and quit listening to the Dem sources that are lying to you.

Cases; Watchdog Sues Arizona Counties for Allegedly Not Removing Non-Citizens from Voter Rolls

America First Legal Asks Arizona Supreme Court to Order State Officials to Use Lawful Tools to Remove Noncitizens from Voter Rolls

So many problems with legit elections;

Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, who oversees early voting and voter registration in the nation’s fourth largest county, said his office discovered a glitch in that system while verifying the citizenship of a person with a pre-1996 license. The office found that the person was a lawful permanent resident but not a citizen eligible to vote affect 100,000 voters who have drivers licenses but are not citizens.

CNN-An independent investigation conducted by former Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ruth McGregor found that older printers and longer ballots printed on heavier paper were to blame for a printer issue at several precincts in Maricopa County that prevented some ballots from being properly scanned on site during Election Day 2022.

There is no legit oversight. Then there are the many reports of people feeding the same votes in multiple times.

And you claim it's all perfectly legit- wrong- it's a shit show of partisanship.

Sep 18, 2024, fine example of dealing with election shenanigans in Nevada.

"It is my position that these registrants have not satisfied Arizona’s documented proof of citizenship law, and therefore can only vote a ‘FED ONLY’ ballot,"

"Arizona's proof of citizenship law uniquely requires voters to prove their citizenship to participate in local and state races.

Interesting.

If you cant prove citizenship you can vote in a federal election...but not in a state election.

what could possibly be the reason for that rule?

So yeah, when GG asks if Trump happens to win will the MAGA crowd still say it was a fraudulent election, the answer is Yes. It will just mean that Trump won by a large enough margin to beat the amount of intentional Democrat fraud!

It's Stalin-esque....and that what we get with Dem rule....a prostituted system with more and more corruption.

They claim the Reps are going to prosecute political enemies....but if one opens their eyes it's the dems already doing that. Sending the FBI to peoples houses for a Conservative tweet- thats nuts. With all of the crime and corruption...and they are sicking the FBI on Conservative tweets....wow...and the Dem voter base remains clueless.

The Court’s constitutionally prescribed role is to vindicate the individual rights of the people appearing before it. The presumed “election lawsuits” were not actually based on all judicable set of facts. But that it was not capable of quantifying whom or how many people were actually being injured in the case.

Many other cases were denied when the courts (grammar police) found clerical errors. Errors due to a rush to beat a time constraint are normal. What isn't normal is refusing to rehear the case after the corrections are rendered and resubmitted

Federal law and USSC precedent is the reason. There is no requirement to provide proof of citizenship documents to register to vote in federal elections. Surveys have shown that 1 out of 10 legal voters don't have proof of citizenship documents, like a birth certificate, passport, or a naturalization certificate. From my link:

"Federal law requires states to accept registration forms that call for applicants to swear under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens and review this warning: “If I have provided false information, I may be fined, imprisoned, or (if not a U.S. citizen) deported from or refused entry to the United States.”

States can make their own laws to require proof of citizenship documents to register for state elections, but not for federal elections. So far, only Arizona has done that.

It’s a fact that you seem to have just become aware of or missed earlier in the thread. Once again, not being a wise guy. But, this is in 100% contradiction of the story you and Jason paint.

I u destined it may not be a top priority on a lot of people’s mind. But, it sure should be if the intended republic is by the people, for the people.

Justin, there's no contradiction. Jason and I have been very consistent in pointing out that the massive voter fraud that some of you insist exists has never been proven by either political team. Both sides whine about it when they lose, but they can never prove it. Note, that I said "massive voter fraud". I fully acknowledge that some minuscule level of voter fraud has always existed, and probably always will, but not to the extent necessary to change an election's results.

The Arizona thing is a perfect example. The headlines read: "Arizona Supreme Court rules 98,000 people whose citizenship is unconfirmed can vote in pivotal election". And people's heads explode. What they don't realize is NO state can require proof of citizenship documentation to register to vote in a federal election because that's federal law. The applicants only have to swear to their citizenship status under penalty of perjury. That's how it's been for decades. Should that change? I would say, yes, but it will require federal legislation and most likely a USSC ruling.

Why? Why would you want to change a system that's rock solid and has awlays gotten it right?

Correctly pointing out that it is not widespread isn’t something deserving of condemnation either; facts are the lifeblood of healthy debate and there will be times when facts may make some of us uncomfortable.

Where there has been consistency is in the area of election integrity; all who have weighed in have been united on this point. The only point worthy of discussion is that one; every option to that end should be on the table and that won’t happen if it is drowned out by hysteria, hyperbole and deliberate misrepresentations.

We forfeit the right to demand higher standards whenever we fail to first live up to them ourselves.

It confuses me how we know the extent of this when no one is looking into it. I need one of the crystal balls several bowsiters possess to continually insinuate that there’s some idea of how minuscule the results of these efforts are.

Where can I buy o e of these crystal balls at?

So many ways to cheat, especially with mail-in voting. Ballot harvesting is illegal in many states, but even when it occurs in those states, once those illegally harvested ballots are in the system and counted there is no way to find them and remove them from the totals. No one even tries. They go in as legal ballots even when harvested illegally!

Ballot drop boxes in critical swing states were setup to take ballots 24/7. Who really needs to drop a ballot at 2am? And multiple ballots at a time?? How would officials know if illegally harvested or not? When those drop box ballots are collected and transported they must legally be counted and signed for at each step of the process. So what do you do when the signed totals do not match (as was documented numerous times)?? The chain of custody was not legally documented or accurate. They decided to just accept the whole lot. Technically fraud by the legal definiton, i would think.

What about ballots that were delivered and submitted at addresses that are abandoned buildings or commercial properties? NOT a legal residence. How may of those were investigated with the corresponding votes removed from the total?? Hmmmm?

What about documented cases where someone files a change of address form with the post office and moves during an election year. We know they voted in state #1. But no one has ever checked to see if they voted in state #2. Or college kids who go to school in a different state - how often do they vote in both states? No one knows. How long should we pretend this doesn't happen?

So you can't define how many fraudulent votes would actually mean "widespread" and you have no idea how many fraudulent votes actually occurred....

Forget deliberately ambiguous terms like "widespread". What a con!!

Why not just ask - was the level of election fraud you believe occurred enough to change the outcome in 2020?? I believe yes. Believe what you want.... but if this is happening at the levels it seems to be happening, then this country is already lost. Gone. Done. And never coming back.

And you ought to be a whole lot more outagraged by THAT than by any personal animosity for all things Trump!

Are you serious? Nobody is looking into it? Voter fraud has been at the top of red team's list since Trump claimed it was the reason he didn't win the popular vote in 2016. Then he ratcheted the narrative up when he lost in 2020. Literally hundreds of lawsuits and investigations have ensued, and it's still at the top of the list today. Yet, despite all of that, nobody has proven enough voter fraud to change an election because "no one is looking into it"? That's laughable.

Furthermore, if voter fraud is so easy and widespread as some of you claim, do you honestly think only the blue team is doing it? Are you really that naive?

And who is naive here??? LOL.

BOOM!

Why should I admit to something that isn't true? During the pandemic, it was state legislatures that decided to expand mail-in voting options, not the US Congress. 6 states already had state-wide mail-in voting. Colorado has had it for a decade. The majority of states have no-excuse needed absentee voting, which is basically the same as mail-in voting. It's not like it's some new phenomenon.

If I'm not mistaken, the SAVE bill, that will require proof of citizenship for federal elections, just passed the House. Hopefully the Senate will scrape together enough votes to pass it. Either way, it will likely require the USSC to overturn their 2013 ruling that stated proof of citizenship documentation was unconstitutional.

But go ahead and blame Democrats, if it makes you feel better. I think the majority of people on both sides of the political fence want fair and honest elections.

America is WAY the hell better at this game than some $hithole country run by warlord gangs. Our voting process isn't rigged and corrupt as hell. There are no effheads screwing with our votes. No we aren't perfect but we sure as hell haven't sunk to their level. The bottom line in THIS country is, "We the people...".

Show us one quote where anyone said there is no voter fraud.

I respectfully disagree. I believe there are voting precincts in this country where voter fraud is common. And I believe the fraud is carried out by both parties to some degree, but by far more cheating is perpetrated by Democrats.

Errors, mistakes, 'shit happens' etc. certainly has occured. But it is absolutely minimal in the US. I'd be willing to bet mistakes etc. are WELL under 1% of the entire vote.

This is the >>>United States of America<<<. Not some shithole country.

The Republicans stopped that bill in the Senate, and it has lingered ever since, waiting for an emergency to exploit.

And covid gave them exactly that. But it was all planned years earlier. By the Dems. And you know it.

LBJ was elected a senator due to 87voter fraud votes. Dukes of Duval is the book written about that. Others? Probably. But arguing with narcissist election experts is certainly a waste of oxygen.

when the GOP figure out they have to play by the same rules the Democrats do THEN maybe they'll have a chance to win

Ask yourself, why would the Dem politicos push so hard for a system that requires no identification or verification and makes it so easy to cheat? Simple...

They are proving that there is way more corruption out there than the Democrat politicos claim.

Only a few of these folks ever get caught; A former Milwaukee election official is fined $3,000 for obtaining fake absentee ballots MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A former Milwaukee election official convicted of misconduct in office for obtaining fake absentee ballots was sentenced Thursday to one year of probation and fined $3,000.

_____________ Recent analysis of Wisconsin-

Wisconsin: 748,000 Identified Address Issues

Selected categories:

-Postal Service Invalid Address 11,291

-Missing or wrong APT, Unit No. 67,132

-Door Not Accessible to deliver mail 5,053

-Mailing error codes mail may not arrive 138,843

-Person is no longer at the address 14,307

-Duplicates, same name and address 1,133

-Voter left no forwarding address 16,747

-Permanently moved out of state 42,043

-Permanently moved to new WI county 56,457

Now apply that logic to states that mail out ballots automatically to every single voter, whether requested or not. EASY for hundreds of thousands of ballots to be sent out to dead people every year. And nothing stopping someone else from mailing it in on their behalf. This automatic mail in ballot system is RIPEfor fraud, and very much by design.

The Democrats may be scumbags, but they are not stupid....

Shucks. Imagine that. Kamala the border czar pumps 10 million extra illegals into the country and some of them found a way onto the voting rolls. LOL

But as long as it's only happening 'widely' around the country and 'spread' out among all 50 states.... if no one calls it "widespread" we'll just chalk it up as a funny co-in-ki-dink

Plenty of things in place to prevent their vote being counted when this is done. So nice try.

I'm glad you bring this up; I'm not sure if you considered this when posting this but you actually support what some of the posters have been saying about election fraud not being widespread and mechanisms being in place to catch many attempts at it.

Oregon did have 1,259 voter registrations that shouldn't have happened; of that number 10 actually voted though 1 had become a citizen, and thereby eligible so the total number of fraudulent votes cast would have been 9 of the 1,259 ineligible registrants or 0.71% of that number. Now when you figure those 9 into the total number of votes cast in Oregon that percent gets miniscular.

In short, the example you cite while showing there is some fraud (and no one has ever questioned that there is some fraud) shows that there are safeguards that are working to minimize the amount to where realistically, unless we're talking a municipal election it would have no impact on an outcome.

We should certainly continue to strive for improvement; I don't think any amount is ever acceptable. We also need to be realistic; we are imperfect beings and the likelihood that we will create imperfect systems is a distinct possibility. All we can do is everything humanly possible to ensure we don't sacrifice election integrity.

I started working for myself about 12 years ago. And, when I started I was so over whelmed with the tasks of physical work and keeping paperwork up to date and relevant. There simply wasn’t enough time in the day.

Once I developed a system, I quickly started seeing that the extra couple hundred bucks I hadn’t figured here, or the extra time it took to do it versus my estimate, more fuel then I allotted for, etc…. All added up to be a huge number at the end of the year. Huge.

Voter fraud is the same way. Because that’s the way it works in real life. There’s zero doubt about the possibility of it happening. And, there’s zero doubt it’s going to get worse from here if we don’t address it.

There is simply too many little things every where to claim it’s insignificant or doesn’t matter. No matter what you are doing, a bunch of little things wrong always adds up to a big problem. That’s the way math works. And, that’s the way life works. In every situation you’ll face.

We’ve got a potential voting issue that needs addressed. Country wide. Because This republic does not exist if the citizenships vote is fraudulent.

Mike, you bring up a great point about people as well. We are indeed flawed. And, human nature says when people figure out a way to cheat, they will do it. I realize that wasn’t the whole intent of your post. But, to suggest our failure to solidify our voting is suspect due to flawed people, it only makes sense to assume it has to be considered the other way as well. Because People cheat. They always have and they always will when opportunity allows it.

From Covid to voter fraud to everything else in life, if everything points to a probable cause, why do we have so many people unwilling to simply say the taboo? What is wrong with saying let’s get this right? For the life of me I don’t know how any single person can just shrug this off as no biggie when the opportunity to plagiarize our republic is so apparent. With all the info we have, it only makes sense we get on top of this before it bites us in the butt.

It’s that important if our country and society are to remain a functional republic.

No matter who says differently, until we have a system that is auditing the whole process. From local precincts to where it’s tallied by state, my opinion and everyone else is just that. An opinion. Opinions suck until facts define the situation. The facts says every state needs to get this right. Then, no matter the outcome, it is what it is.

This video shows Maryland Democrat Congressman Jamie Raskin unveiling a plan for Congress to implement “civil war conditions” and disqualify former President Donald Trump if he wins the November presidential election... a dangerous shenanigan indeed.

Nothing to all of the above but that's not where the problem would be, it would be in what happens after submission.

Voters sign an affidavit when returning an absentee or mail-in ballot which is on the ballot envelope. Election officials compare the signature on the affidavit to the voters signature on file, usually from the voter registration record.

Some states do have a process for when a signature on the affidavit doesn't match the signature on file; they may call the voter, ask them to verify their information and if they did, in fact, cast that ballot.

As I said earlier, while the system isn't perfect it does catch the majority of the attempts at vote fraud. Also, as I said earlier, this doesn't mean efforts to improve the system shouldn't be undertaken-they most definitely should.

Actually we're both wrong; 32 states verify signature and there are 8 that only require the voter sign an affidavit or oath. 10 states do not verify signature but do have some safeguards; some require a witness or witnesses (and some of these can use a Notary Public in lieu of those), some require a Drivers license or other form of ID be included and in Alaska the form can be signed by either a witness or election official.

Of the disputed battleground states in 2020, 2 did compare signatures (AZ, MI) and the other 3 (GA, PA, WI) have other safeguards.

It's interesting that of the states verifying signatures some are among the most liberal; CA, IL, MA, NJ, NY, OR and WA.

In any event, I stand corrected and appreciate the error being brought to my attention.

Heck, I think it was 60 minutes that exposed the ballot harvesting for Omar. If you search Youtube...you can find it.

They interviewed a couple Solmali guys and followed them around with them explaining how they do it...in fact they showed piles of ballots the one guy had harvested in the back seat of his car. Busted, right? Nope....

So they have this guy on camera illegally harvesting ballots and the FBI and DOJ did nothing. There are only 2 possible conclusions;

They don't want Dem vote harvesting exposed or

They are too incompetent when the evidence is right there in front of them

It doesn't matter who votes...but who counts the votes.

No worries, the comment was more tongue-in-cheek than anything else! Though they don't verify signatures the 10 states that have other procedures (witness, notaries, ID including driver's license) certainly minimize the potential for fraud.

I'm most concerned with the 8 states that essentially appear to be taking it on faith; e.g. sign an "oath" that you're voting legitimately. I think in an environment where the desire is to reassure the public that the vote is secure those states would want to stiffen their validation of absentee/mail-in votes (sadly, but not surprisingly, my home state is one of the eight....)

In any event, it's all good and I honestly did appreciate the correction.

How does a signature verification really prove anything when a signature can vary a great deal.... there is just a poll watcher giving it a general glance? Its hardly an exact science or positive proof (like a fingerprint might be!)

How about if the fraud is a person falsely signing up to vote and the initial signature on the voter application is theirs?? Any later signature check is merely a check back against the original criminal signature!

Even in the original Oregon example, that story is only checking (and finding) non-citizens looking back to 2021. How about PRIOR to 2021?? And how many of the 50 states have not even done that much effort to purge non-citizens from the voter lists???

What protections are in place to stop someone from voting in one state, and then moving and voting in the other/new state? Or a college kid using both a home address and a college address to vote twice??

Certainly there are situations that isn’t possible. But, at what cost? That’s was the issue blinding me previously. It’s a tough situation.

We simply have zero idea.

Non-citizens are ineligible to vote in federal elections so this is a moot point. States verify voter identity and information using state and/or federal databases, such as the Social Security Administration or state departments of motor vehicles. By cross-referencing information that the voter provides against information provided by these entities, election administrators can ensure that identifying information submitted on voter registration forms is accurate and legitimate.

"How does a signature verification really prove anything when a signature can vary a great deal.... there is just a poll watcher giving it a general glance? Its hardly an exact science or positive proof (like a fingerprint might be!)"

Check the link I provided for adjudication processes when a signature is questioned. I'd also offer that slight variability is certainly understandable whereas signatures that are nowhere near the original would be easy to detect even for the average lay person.

"How about if the fraud is a person falsely signing up to vote and the initial signature on the voter application is theirs?? Any later signature check is merely a check back against the original criminal signature!"

Again, refer to how each state confirms voter eligibility; the safeguards are in place and with all due respect your question shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the process. I appreciate the concern and it's certainly well-placed; the problem is it's not well focused.

"Even in the original Oregon example, that story is only checking (and finding) non-citizens looking back to 2021. How about PRIOR to 2021?? And how many of the 50 states have not even done that much effort to purge non-citizens from the voter lists???"

The simple explanation would likely be that the furor over the 2020 election prompted closer scrutiny of the voting rolls; I'd call that a good first step. As far as state efforts to purge non-eligible voters (for whatever reason) that's an ongoing effort in many states and one that's been hotly contested by those who argue it could lead to disenfranchisement of eligible voters. I'd argue to those making the disenfranchisement argument that they should work to ensure that doesn't happen while serving the public good of cleaning up voter rolls.

"What protections are in place to stop someone from voting in one state, and then moving and voting in the other/new state? Or a college kid using both a home address and a college address to vote twice??"

I'd advise you begin with researching the residency requirements of each state; it's not as simple as your example suggests. College students, depending on the state of their school may also need to meet residency requirements if they wish to vote where they attend college. It's also election fraud if a college student meets residency requirements where they attend school and votes and then tries to vote in their home state.

The question that should arise is how would this be detected? 30 states currently participate in an Interstate Voter Registration cross-check that is designed to detect duplicate registrations. The Heritage Foundation has made an excellent recommendation that this program be expanded to all 50 states.

Speaking of the Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation’s analysis of legal actions regarding election conduct found only 24 instances of noncitizens voting between 2003 and 2023.

As I've said a few times, the system isn't as broken as some seem to believe, nor is it as good as it can and should be. It's a lot easier to fix a problem when the scope isn't exaggerated; such baseless claims are easily disproven and damage the credibility of those who rightly argue that our elections need to be as secure as humanly possible.

As for your comments on double voting (such as in two states) read more at NCSL (National Conference of State Legislators). Yes, only some states share information at all.... AND it doesn't mean they actually use that information, or make that effort, or can even accomplish a successful cross search if tried. Per the NCSL themselves: "Election officials may also learn that a voter has moved by running a check against the U.S. Postal Service’s change of address database. Even if states share data and conduct checks with postal lists, though, it can be difficult to identify perfect matches..."

Simply test this theory - how many voters have been arrested for voting in dual states? Are you suggesting it doesn't happen at all? Or that it doesn't happen often? How would you measure the number of crimes that occur without being caught? The Heritage numbers you stated for how many have been caught and prosecuted, has no bearing on how much successful fraud has actually occurred. Would you agree??

As for the signature checks - just look up Melowese Richardson of Ohio. She voted numerous times for her sister (who was in a coma) and at least twice herself for Obama (once by absentee ballot and again in person) and it appears 3-4 other people, too. It happens. She eventually got caught, but that has no measurable bearing on how many others did not. Though it does prove that signature checks do not prevent voter fraud.

Or how about another example to understand the error in your simply stating laws and prosecutions as some validation of secure voting. Most criminals get their guns through illegal straw purchases. Happens all the time. RARELY prosecuted. In 2017, the ATF flagged 112,000 gun applications, investigated 12,700, and prosecuted only 12!! (reference GAO-18-440 report). So your stating the voting fraud prosecution numbers would be a meaningless example of how often a crime actually occurred or how often it was successful.

Here is another current events example to consider. You have the Biden/Kamala team import tens of thousands of Haitians and other TPS people from select countries into the critical battleground state of PA. Indisputable. They get financial assistance from the government (a government check) and a drivers license. Also indisputable. See attached for the PA voting rules and forms of ID required. These tens of thousands of TPS people placed in PA now have two forms of qualifying ID to vote. Other than it being technically illegal, what physically stops these TPS migrants from voting in the critical battleground state of PA??

You misunderstood what my point about this being moot was; the issuance of a drivers license to a non-citizen doesn't remove the legal barrier to them voting; that still remains. That's the sole basis of it being a moot point.

"As for your comments on double voting (such as in two states) read more at NCSL (National Conference of State Legislators). Yes, only some states share information at all.... AND it doesn't mean they actually use that information, or make that effort, or can even accomplish a successful cross search if tried. Per the NCSL themselves: "Election officials may also learn that a voter has moved by running a check against the U.S. Postal Service’s change of address database. Even if states share data and conduct checks with postal lists, though, it can be difficult to identify perfect matches...""

You're making me wonder now if you read all of mine; I listed the states sharing information; what they do with that ability is up to them and I have no basis of knowledge as to their respective adherence to the procedure. I also stated that the proposal from the Heritage Foundation to make this a shared responsibility for all 50 states is a great idea. Build the foundation and then provide the infrastructure to ensure adherence, the infrastructure to thoroughly data mine and most importantly, enforcement.

"Simply test this theory - how many voters have been arrested for voting in dual states? Are you suggesting it doesn't happen at all?"

The numbers are small and are easily found in the Heritage Foundation database which I believed I've referenced before. As to what I'm "suggesting", I really wish you'd lose that nasty proclivity for inferring something I've clearly said the exact opposite of. It doesn't help your argument at all.

"How would you measure the number of crimes that occur without being caught? The Heritage numbers you stated for how many have been caught and prosecuted, has no bearing on how much successful fraud has actually occurred. Would you agree??"

How would anyone measure undetected crimes? Was there really a point to this question? As to the second part it's hard to assign bearing to an unknown quantity so I can't agree to your premise but I absolutely would agree that there are some who perpetrate voting fraud and do get away with it. That's why I keep saying that regardless of how minimal a percent of total votes cast are fraudulent it doesn't mean we shouldn't make every effort to improve voting safeguards.

"As for the signature checks - just look up Melowese Richardson of Ohio. She voted numerous times for her sister (who was in a coma) and at least twice herself for Obama (once by absentee ballot and again in person) and it appears 3-4 other people, too. It happens. She eventually got caught, but that has no measurable bearing on how many others did not. Though it does prove that signature checks do not prevent voter fraud."

The plural of anecdote is not data; I've definitely referenced signature checks as a voting safeguard but I've never once promised they are a 100% perfect system to prevent fraud.

"Or how about another example to understand the error in your simply stating laws and prosecutions as some validation of secure voting."

Damn, you had to do it again; yes I've stated voting safeguards including laws and prosecutions but again, never once did I state or even infer a guarantee of secure voting.

"Most criminals get their guns through illegal straw purchases. Happens all the time. RARELY prosecuted. In 2017, the ATF flagged 112,000 gun applications, investigated 12,700, and prosecuted only 12!! (reference GAO-18-440 report). So your stating the voting fraud prosecution numbers would be a meaningless example of how often a crime actually occurred or how often it was successful."

Actually, the only number that can be accurately quantified is the one dealing with those caught and prosecuted; the other (uncaught) is pure supposition. I get what you're saying and its a valid consideration, one that should prompt efforts to bolster current security measures.

"Here is another current events example to consider. You have the Biden/Kamala team import tens of thousands of Haitians and other TPS people from select countries into the critical battleground state of PA. Indisputable. They get financial assistance from the government (a government check) and a drivers license. Also indisputable. See attached for the PA voting rules and forms of ID required. These tens of thousands of TPS people placed in PA now have two forms of qualifying ID to vote. Other than it being technically illegal, what physically stops these TPS migrants from voting in the critical battleground state of PA??"

While they may have the two forms of qualifying ID to vote they still need to register to vote; that would be the first major roadblock in them voting before any voting safeguards for whatever voting method would be needed.

Poll workers wouldn't find a registration to go along with the forms of ID so this would be a "do not pass go, do not collect $200."

Kinda like asking other than it being illegal, what prevents people from killing each other.

For the vast, vast, vast majority of people, the consequences of being caught committing are indeed an effective deterrent. In short, it’s just not a risk worth taking.

Might make it easier to figure out what’s going on when we read later that precincts in Philly had 100+ % voter turnout. I understand that some states allow Election Day registration but that’s a very small number of people.

Because they couldn’t care less about voting. They are here to make a living, and showing up at the polls to vote for candidates and platforms they likely know nothing about risks them losing what they are here for. Bob has it right.

Among the common examples of voting fraud – submitting someone else’s ballot with a fake signature, double voting in two states, illegal aliens voting, dead people voting, ballot harvesting in states where it is illegal, missing chain of custody information from midnight ballot drop boxes, etc… ALL of these fraudulent voting actions have in fact occurred.

The only question is how often they succeed without discovery (no one knows), how widespread it is (no one knows) and whether it has affected the election outcome (no one knows).

But if you think Joe Biden, on his 3rd attempt at the Presidency, with cognitive disorders, with a minimal campaigning effort and a good bit of time hiding in his basement, reading from a teleprompter - somehow managed to set a 100 year high national election turnout in 2020… you are deluding yourself.

In the PA example (critical swing state where Biden/Kamala sent tens of thousands of migrants) could an illegal or TPS alien register to vote and successfully vote illegally – using only their drivers license and/or government check as an ID? I have serious concern. The PA House tried to pass HB1334 in 2021 to require proof of citizenship, but it seems the Democrats stopped that safeguard, too. Imagine that!!

It also seems to me that the TDS crowd doesn’t mind all that much that the Dems are cheating to keep Trump out of office. LOL. But just remember the name of the game when the cheating is against a candidate you support, or the fate of the nation is once again at stake!

Actually you've done a very fine job of making my point though I doubt you realize it. Laws are much more than a speed bump and the sheer volume of those who follow them attests to it on a daily basis. Whatever the subject, be it voting, guns, robbing banks, whatever the overwhelming majority of citizens do in fact follow the law and it certainly dissuades otherwise.

While you've provided many examples they are basically the equivalent of someone holding up a glass of water and trying to equate it with the volume of water in an ocean.

"Among the common examples of voting fraud – submitting someone else’s ballot with a fake signature, double voting in two states, illegal aliens voting, dead people voting, ballot harvesting in states where it is illegal, missing chain of custody information from midnight ballot drop boxes, etc… ALL of these fraudulent voting actions have in fact occurred."

None of which I've ever disputed and all of which I've acknowledged multiple times. The fact you consistently fail to acknowledge is the proportional relationship between those who cast votes legally versus those who do not. As no one can quantify what isn't detected neither you or I can assign any value to that entity. And again, regardless of the actual, verifiable quantity of fraudulent voting any and all means to bolster voting security should be undertaken; again, a point I've made repeatedly.

"The only question is how often they succeed without discovery (no one knows), how widespread it is (no one knows) and whether it has affected the election outcome (no one knows)."

Agreed; absent better safeguards that might quantify the unkown I choose not to skew fraud statistics that I can't attest to as being factually accurate.

"But if you think Joe Biden, on his 3rd attempt at the Presidency, with cognitive disorders, with a minimal campaigning effort and a good bit of time hiding in his basement, reading from a teleprompter - somehow managed to set a 100 year high national election turnout in 2020… you are deluding yourself."

No argument there but I'll add another to the pool of unknown quantifiables; just how large was the anti-Trump voting block? I don't recall ever seeing a question in any exit poll that specifically asked did you vote against Donald Trump?

"In the PA example (critical swing state where Biden/Kamala sent tens of thousands of migrants) could an illegal or TPS alien register to vote and successfully vote illegally – using only their drivers license and/or government check as an ID? I have serious concern. The PA House tried to pass HB1334 in 2021 to require proof of citizenship, but it seems the Democrats stopped that safeguard, too. Imagine that!!"

This still omits the reality that those non-citizens would not be able to register to vote; presenting valid forms of ID would not address the fact that their names would not appear on a list of eligible, registered voters. I could play devils advocate and say that PA House Democrats may have felt there was no need to establish citizenship given the issue with trying to register but that might be assigning noble motivations that don't exist.....

"It also seems to me that the TDS crowd doesn’t mind all that much that the Dems are cheating to keep Trump out of office. LOL. But just remember the name of the game when the cheating is against a candidate you support, or the fate of the nation is once again at stake!"

That's the greatest tragedy of the Republican party, that we have members who put self-interest above the good of the country. I've no doubt many of these constituted the "vote against Trump" contingent in 2020 and are likely to repeat the act in 2024.

A final point; I don't want our back and forth to create the impression with anyone that I don't respect you or your viewpoints; I respect anyone who stands firm on principle and fights the good fight. In all honesty that extends beyond party and other demographics; we have serious problems in this country and I can't help but feel many could be solved if we could move back towards talking to each other instead of at each other.

Here's a link to the Texas Sec of State instructions to allow Illegals that have a DL to vote in Texas.

Link is to Twitter....video is the voting official explaining the rule ...and below that is the official Sec of State instruction on their letterhead.

scent

Clearly missing the whole point of the Secretary of State's answer. He is not “allowing illegals to vote.”

They had to register to vote. A DL presented at the polls is used to prove you are who you say you are and that you are a previously registered voter, not that you are a citizen. Citizenship is confirmed at the time you register to vote, not when you go to the polls. A DL that says you were a non-citizen in the past doesn’t mean you are a non-citizen now.

I bet you don't even realize the amount of excuses you make for these corrupt Democrat officials.

Just like you were easily fooled into thinking illegals aren't voting in Arizona. It's right on the Application. Open the PDF application and it states it right there- they don't ask for verification on national elections.

Then there is the audited voter roles showing a bunch of illegals on the Maricopa county roles- what was it, 218,000, I can't remember exactly.

Cmon man, it's right there in front of you....stop making excuses for the crooked Democrats....you are acting like a pawn promoting 3rd world corruption.

Yes they do.

"Then there is the audited voter roles showing a bunch of illegals on the Maricopa county roles- what was it, 218,000, I can't remember exactly."

No it wasn't. No such audit showed anything even close to that. The only thing that even comes close to resembling that remark is the AZ Supreme Court ruling that roughly 100,000 AZ residents who obtained driver's licenses before 1996 were incorrectly marked as showing proof of citizenship when in fact they hadn't (as the laws did not require them to until 2005). These are not "illegals." EDIT: I see that they say there are now 218,000 registered voters who are impacted. Still doesn't change the fact that undoubtedly these are all likely citizens. They are people who have been in the State for nearly 30 years (ie, when they first got their state DLs).

It's easy to think there's a problem when you don’t understand the facts and/or when you keep making them up.