Author Topic: Alabama Secretary of State Launches Voter Fraud Investigation in Senate Special Election  (Read 1755 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52,411
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Then why did the Supreme Court down there rule to have the results not destroyed after the election?

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/judge_orders_alabama_not_to_de.html

@Frank Cannon

I think you need to read that a little more closely.  Looks like they were NOT prevented from destroying the digital copies.
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Offline edpc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,879
  • Gender: Male
  • Professional Misanthrope - Briefer and Boxer
Yeah - so those other 4 special elections they lost this year with massive outside consultation/donor support were just dry runs to fine tune their master plan and calculate with genius precision the turnout they'd need to win by razor thin margin in one of the reddest of red states.....?



 :facepalm2:



Some of you people are unfreakingbelievable.

The fact is - Moore sucked and couldn't generate the turnout he needed for victory in a state that was easily winnable.


« Last Edit: December 20, 2017, 04:47:57 pm by edpc »
I disagree.  Circle gets the square.

Offline Victoria33

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,457
  • Gender: Female
Yeah! I know! Because all of those volunteer election judges are as pure as driven snow!  /s
@Bigun

The party of election judges are chosen this way in Texas:
If the voting precinct voted in the majority for the Republican governor in the last election for governor, the judge is a Republican.  If the precinct voted in the majority for the Democrat governor, the judge is a Democrat.  The alternate judge is of the other party of the judge.  All are required to go through training.  That is what I did over Texas, train election judges and clerks and I did that in your county.

Since the alternate judge is of the opposite party of the judge, the alternate would know the judge was not doing something right and would speak up as that is part of their job.

There is another check in Texas.  On election day, there is a Republican Party committee, made up of knowledge people in the law, including some lawyers.  I was on that committee.  We stayed at our computers all day and if a problem was sent to us from a judge or alternate judge, we told him/her what to do to fix the problem.
!!!

Offline skeeter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26,717
  • Gender: Male
Yeah - so those other 4 special elections they lost this year with massive outside consultation/donor support were just dry runs to fine tune their master plan and calculate with genius precision the turnout they'd need to win by razor thin margin in one of the reddest of red states.....?



 :facepalm2:



Some of you people are unfreakingbelievable.

The fact is - Moore sucked and couldn't generate the turnout he needed for victory in a state that was easily winnable.




Calm down. An occasional investigation into voter fraud is a healthy thing.

Especially when you have people openly bragging about cheating, wouldn't you say?

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52,411
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
@Bigun

The party of election judges are chosen this way in Texas:
If the voting precinct voted in the majority for the Republican governor in the last election for governor, the judge is a Republican.  If the precinct voted in the majority for the Democrat governor, the judge is a Democrat.  The alternate judge is of the other party of the judge.  All are required to go through training.  That is what I did over Texas, train election judges and clerks and I did that in your county.

Since the alternate judge is of the opposite party of the judge, the alternate would know the judge was not doing something right and would speak up as that is part of their job.

There is another check in Texas.  On election day, there is a Republican Party committee, made up of knowledge people in the law, including some lawyers.  I was on that committee.  We stayed at our computers all day and if a problem was sent to us from a judge or alternate judge, we told him/her what to do to fix the problem.
!!!

@Victoria33

I was an election judge in the state of Texas for a LONG time dear and well know the lengths gone to in order to try and prevent election fraud in Texas but neither you nor I nor the State of Texas can prevent it if a corrupt set of election officials decide to circumvent the rules.
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Offline TomSea

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 40,432
  • Gender: Male
  • All deserve a trial if accused
@Victoria33

All elections or practically all should be checked for accuracy to begin with.

Offline edpc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,879
  • Gender: Male
  • Professional Misanthrope - Briefer and Boxer
Calm down. An occasional investigation into voter fraud is a healthy thing.

Especially when you have people openly bragging about cheating, wouldn't you say?


I'd say if this guy is actually openly bragging about this, he's got a bigger pair than Daley ever had.
I disagree.  Circle gets the square.

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member

I'd say if this guy is actually openly bragging about this, he's got a bigger pair than Daley ever had.

Or, is massively stupid.   :shrug:

Offline edpc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,879
  • Gender: Male
  • Professional Misanthrope - Briefer and Boxer
Or, is massively stupid.   :shrug:

Which would make the idea he's part or has any real knowledge of a mass voter fraud conspiracy even more ludicrous.
I disagree.  Circle gets the square.

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member
Which would make the idea he's part or has any real knowledge of a mass voter fraud conspiracy even more ludicrous.

Not really.  That's the type they would use for voter fraud.  Anyone any smarter would worry that they might get caught.

Offline Victoria33

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,457
  • Gender: Female
@Victoria33
All elections or practically all should be checked for accuracy to begin with.
@TomSea
@mystery-ak

Before an election, if voting machines are used, they are checked for accuracy before the election.  Votes are made on the machines, then the machines are checked for accurately counting those votes.  When voting machines are passed for accuracy, they are locked in a room with two locks.  The election administrator had one key and the sheriff has the other key.  Both keys must be used to get in that room.

On election day, the sheriff's deputies delivers the machines to the voting precincts.  Then, the judge and alternate judge check each machine to make sure it is set at zero.

At the end of the day, the judge and alternate judge take the disk from the machines and followed by a sheriff's deputy, take the disks to the central counting station.  There is a back up disk in the guts of the voting machine and the only way that can be taken out is by an employee of the machine company.  That is to insure if there is a contest of the election numbers, those disks can be taken out and compared with the disks turned in.

If paper ballots are used, the count of number of ballots is checked by both the judge/alternate judge.  There is a record from them of how many ballots they had to begin with and how many voted ballots they had at the end along with the number of ballots not used.  Also, when they get their ballots from the election administrator before the election, there is a sheet with the number of ballots they are taking.

Once they get to central counting, another check is done to make sure the number of voted ballots turned in is the same number they had at the end of the day and the total number of ballots is compared to the total the election administrator gave them.  This is done to assure no ballots were added between the end of the day and when they turned them in.

When the paper ballots are run through the machine, any ballot with a problem is kicked out.  There is a Resolution Committee that takes those paper ballots to determine what is wrong and fix it if it can be fixed.  A new ballot is made for those kicked out, and they are sent back through the machine.  Write-in ballots are also kicked out and the committee makes a list of those names and counts them.  The Resolution Committee is composed of an equal number of Republicans and Democrats.  An example of a ballot kicked out, is the voter drew a line through the ones they didn't want and left the one they wanted without a line through it.  The machine can't read that, so a new ballot is made with the voter's choice correctly checked and sent back through the machine.

The general public does not know all this is happening in the background to keep the election fair.  They appear to think an election is called and people just show up to do this stuff.  A political election is done by the county.  If you think your county election is "rigged", read the laws, they are available for your county on line, and then go to your county chairman to find out what he/she does to make sure your county election is being held correctly.  Assuming it is all rigged/corrupt is a meaningless charge unless you do your homework to find out what your county does.

Offline anubias

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,374
Ya think???

You took the words right out of my mouth.   888high58888

Offline Victoria33

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,457
  • Gender: Female
@mystery-ak and anyone who cares how it works in Texas.

I wrote the Texas law that determines who is in central counting in every Texas county to count the votes at the end of election day. Before this law, if the elections administrator was a Democrat, she/he could keep out Republicans in central counting, making only Democrats in there.  A Republican elections administrator could also do that although I never heard of a Republican doing that.  Now, central counting is fair having both parties in there when votes are counted.

Offline edpc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,879
  • Gender: Male
  • Professional Misanthrope - Briefer and Boxer
Not really.  That's the type they would use for voter fraud.  Anyone any smarter would worry that they might get caught.


So what about the hand rubbing, mustache twisting masterminds who have to formulate, fund, and execute the plan?  Are they in some back room shouting 'drat!' right now?
I disagree.  Circle gets the square.

Offline Suppressed

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,921
  • Gender: Male
    • Avatar
ooops, that might help explain the 93% democrat turnout.

There wasn't close to 93% turnout reported.
+++++++++
“In the outside world, I'm a simple geologist. But in here .... I am Falcor, Defender of the Alliance” --Randy Marsh

“The most effectual means of being secure against pain is to retire within ourselves, and to suffice for our own happiness.” -- Thomas Jefferson

“He's so dumb he thinks a Mexican border pays rent.” --Foghorn Leghorn

Offline edpc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,879
  • Gender: Male
  • Professional Misanthrope - Briefer and Boxer
There wasn't close to 93% turnout reported.

True.  That's been one of the most misunderstood numbers out there.  The story was reporting 93% of the number of Democratic voters who turned out in 2016 returned for this election.  For example, if 100 dems voted in 2016, then 93 voted in this one.
I disagree.  Circle gets the square.

Offline Free Vulcan

  • Technical
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,887
  • Gender: Male
  • Ah, the air is so much fresher here...
It was 93% of the 2016 turnout. But let's not use that to diminish the number. Dems vote around 80% of their registered voters on average in a Presidential election. 93% of that would be 74%.

In over 20 years of watching elections I've only seen ONE race, a very small one, where turnout was anywhere near 50%. That was a small local election, not statewide. 25% is a stupendous turnout in that kind of election. This was an off-year, off-month election. 75% percent Dem turnout is BS.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2017, 09:39:04 pm by Free Vulcan »
The Republic is lost.