• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Allegations of Fraud in 2020 US Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
Meadmaker said:
Has anyone provided a credible estimate of just how many ballots are affected?

I haven't followed this very closely, but my understanding is that mail in ballots cannot be "cured" if they don't arrive in the secrecy envelope. In Philadelphia, they were notifying voters that their ballots were rejected. In most of the state (i.e. the Republican counties) they weren't.

So a couple of questions come up.

1) How many ballots are we talking about?

Perhaps more importantly:

Does the statute require that the voter not be notified? That would be weird. It seems to me that the "curing" of the ballot refers to cases where a ballot was received, but with some defect (like, for example, a signature mismatch). At that point, the voter comes in. Provides ID. Generally shows that's his ballot, and the ballot is put in the "accepted" pile.

In this case, it sounds like the voter is notified. They come in. They get a new ballot. Problem solved. In other words, the original ballot is discarded, it is not "cured", but the voter still gets to vote.

That would make a whole lot of sense to me, because I can't imagine a crazy interpretation of a law that says it was illegal to vote after you made a mistake on how your ballot was sent in, and it would be only slightly less crazy to say that an election official was not allowed to inform a voter that their ballot was rejected.


I could have the details of the suit wrong, but it won't keep me awake thinking that Donald Trump might win Pennsylvania, much less the election, based on the outcome of the case.
Click to expand...

Problem is they were ordered by the court that they couldn't contact people for curing.
 

Attachments

  • Equal1.jpg
    Equal1.jpg
    30.4 KB · Views: 8
I'm a little unclear about the point of all these Tahini links. This seems to involve ballots that were rejected due to the lack of return with the security envelope. The so-called 'naked ballots'.

These naked ballots were something the Trump campaign went out of their way to make sure they were rejected. Now they want them counted? I'm actually fine with them being counted, but I fail to see how this is a huge win for Trump.

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/01/9183...ead-to-thousands-of-pa-votes-getting-rejected
 
acbytesla said:
You didn't read it did you?

Read it again. Trump (the plaintiff) has filed suit and those groups have requested seats at the defendant's table.
Click to expand...


No, you aren't reading. The sworn statements are from the interveners. If you actually read them you would know this by the fact that they say their votes shouldn't be thrown out, the opposite of what Trump is seeking.
 
acbytesla said:
This is your evidence? That's 3 votes. I had a similar experience 8 years ago.
Click to expand...

It's not about the number on record so much as they went against a court order. Hand wave it away all you want. They went against a court order, AND they didn't afford R voters the same opportunity. And that isn't including the other issues that arise from these sworn statements.
 
kookbreaker said:
I'm a little unclear about the point of all these Tahini links. This seems to involve ballots that were rejected due to the lack of return with the security envelope. The so-called 'naked ballots'.

These naked ballots were something the Trump campaign went out of their way to make sure they were rejected. Now they want them counted? I'm actually fine with them being counted, but I fail to see how this is a huge win for Trump.

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/01/9183...ead-to-thousands-of-pa-votes-getting-rejected
Click to expand...


It is amusing. I just love how excited she was thinking that the NAACP and two other liberal were joining Trump's side. She was almost giddy.
 
kookbreaker said:
I'm a little unclear about the point of all these Tahini links. This seems to involve ballots that were rejected due to the lack of return with the security envelope. The so-called 'naked ballots'.

These naked ballots were something the Trump campaign went out of their way to make sure they were rejected. Now they want them counted? I'm actually fine with them being counted, but I fail to see how this is a huge win for Trump.

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/01/9183...ead-to-thousands-of-pa-votes-getting-rejected
Click to expand...

You're failure to understand the implications is not my problem. What's clear is that you are unclear. No they don't want the ballots counted.
 
acbytesla said:
It is amusing. I just love how excited she was thinking that the NAACP and two other liberal were joining Trump's side. She was almost giddy.
Click to expand...

You really should get out of your bubble. I'm not excited, I'm just posting what's going on. That you can't grasp it says more about you than it does about me.
 
Here's a Philadelphia Inquirer article about the status of lawsuits in Pennsylvania. Quick summary: The "late arriving ballot" issue might affect 1,000 votes or more. (I don't remember exactly.)

The "ballot curing" lawsuit looks like it could affect a few hundred ballots, but there isn't any data from Philadelphia County, so it could be more.

It isn't 50,000, and the "curing" lawsuit is fairly dubious, but certainly not ridiculous.

https://www.inquirer.com/news/trump...lphia-giuliani-vote-count-fraud-20201109.html
 
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR
PRESIDENT, INC.; LAWRENCE
ROBERTS; and DAVID JOHN
HENRY;
Plaintiffs,
KATHY BOOCKVAR, in her capacity
as Secretary of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania; ALLEGHENY
COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS;
CENTRE COUNTY BOARD OF
ELECTIONS; CHESTER COUNTY
BOARD OF ELECTIONS;
DELAWARE COUNTY BOARD OF
ELECTIONS; MONTGOMERY
COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS;
NORTHAMPTON COUNTY BOARD
OF ELECTIONS; and
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY BOARD
OF ELECTIONS;
Defendants.


MOTION TO INTERVENE BY NON-PARTIES NAACP—
PENNSYLVANIA STATE CONFERENCE, BLACK POLITICAL
EMPOWERMENT PROJECT, COMMON CAUSE PENNSYLVANIA,
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF PENNSYLVANIA, JOHN AYENI,
LUCIA GAJDA, STEPHANIE HIGGINS, MERIL LARA, RICARDO
MORALES, NATALIE PRICE, TIM STEVENS, AND TAYLOR STOVER
FOR LEAVE TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING ON THE SAME
SCHEDULE AS DEFENDANTS
 
kookbreaker said:
I'm a little unclear about the point of all these Tahini links. This seems to involve ballots that were rejected due to the lack of return with the security envelope. The so-called 'naked ballots'.

These naked ballots were something the Trump campaign went out of their way to make sure they were rejected. Now they want them counted? I'm actually fine with them being counted, but I fail to see how this is a huge win for Trump.

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/01/9183...ead-to-thousands-of-pa-votes-getting-rejected
Click to expand...

You're unclear about posting the actual documents because you obviously didn't read them.
 
acbytesla said:
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR
PRESIDENT, INC.; LAWRENCE
ROBERTS; and DAVID JOHN
HENRY;
Plaintiffs,
KATHY BOOCKVAR, in her capacity
as Secretary of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania; ALLEGHENY
COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS;
CENTRE COUNTY BOARD OF
ELECTIONS; CHESTER COUNTY
BOARD OF ELECTIONS;
DELAWARE COUNTY BOARD OF
ELECTIONS; MONTGOMERY
COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS;
NORTHAMPTON COUNTY BOARD
OF ELECTIONS; and
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY BOARD
OF ELECTIONS;
Defendants.


MOTION TO INTERVENE BY NON-PARTIES NAACP—
PENNSYLVANIA STATE CONFERENCE, BLACK POLITICAL
EMPOWERMENT PROJECT, COMMON CAUSE PENNSYLVANIA,
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF PENNSYLVANIA, JOHN AYENI,
LUCIA GAJDA, STEPHANIE HIGGINS, MERIL LARA, RICARDO
MORALES, NATALIE PRICE, TIM STEVENS, AND TAYLOR STOVER
FOR LEAVE TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING ON THE SAME SCHEDULE AS DEFENDANTS
Click to expand...

Trump filled the suit, he's not the defendant, he's the petitioner. They are filing with the defendants to keep the votes included.
 
Last edited:
TahiniBinShawarma said:
No, you aren't reading. The sworn statements are from the interveners. If you actually read them you would know this by the fact that they say their votes shouldn't be thrown out, the opposite of what Trump is seeking.
Click to expand...

I really don't get it. Especially since they are asking to join the defendants NOT the PLAINTIFFS
 
Meadmaker said:
Here's a Philadelphia Inquirer article about the status of lawsuits in Pennsylvania. Quick summary: The "late arriving ballot" issue might affect 1,000 votes or more. (I don't remember exactly.)

The "ballot curing" lawsuit looks like it could affect a few hundred ballots, but there isn't any data from Philadelphia County, so it could be more.

It isn't 50,000, and the "curing" lawsuit is fairly dubious, but certainly not ridiculous.

https://www.inquirer.com/news/trump...lphia-giuliani-vote-count-fraud-20201109.html
Click to expand...


What makes you think it's "dubious?"
 
TahiniBinShawarma said:
Trump filled the suit, he's not the defendant, he's the petitioner. They are filing with the defendants to keep the votes included.
Click to expand...

Do you have a reading disorder?
Trump is the paintiff aka petitioner.
The State or Pennsylvania and some of it's counties are the defendants.

The NAACP etc has requested to join the defendants! They aren't asking to join on the side of Trump. Wake up!
 
TahiniBinShawarma said:
What makes you think it's "dubious?"
Click to expand...

As stated in the linked article, the practice has been Pennsylvania law for years, and the judge expressed skepticism, noting that the intent of the law seemed to be to enfranchise voters instead of disenfranchise them. In terms of the statutory wording, which I only know from your quote, it appears that voters notified of a flaw in their ballot came in and filed provisional ballots. In other words, the original ballot was not "cured", it was replaced with a new ballot. Apparently the judge is scheduled to issue a ruling tomorrow.
 
acbytesla said:
Do you have a reading disorder?
Trump is the paintiff aka petitioner.
The State or Pennsylvania and some of it's counties are the defendants.

The NAACP etc has requested to join the defendants! They aren't asking to join on the side of Trump. Wake up!
Click to expand...

No YOU have a reading disorder. I never said these people were ON Trumps side. I said they submitted sworn statements that SUPPORT Trumps side. There's a difference.
 
Meadmaker said:
As stated in the linked article, the practice has been Pennsylvania law for years, and the judge expressed skepticism, noting that the intent of the law seemed to be to enfranchise voters instead of disenfranchise them. In terms of the statutory wording, which I only know from your quote, it appears that voters notified of a flaw in their ballot came in and filed provisional ballots. In other words, the original ballot was not "cured", it was replaced with a new ballot. Apparently the judge is scheduled to issue a ruling tomorrow.
Click to expand...

How'd they know there were missing security envelopes inside to contact people?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom