Quantcast
Florida's Election Officials Questionable Behavior During the Recount is Harming Rick Scott

Forums - Politics Discussion - Florida's Election Officials Questionable Behavior During the Recount is Harming Rick Scott

NightlyPoe said:
Final-Fan said:

That may be, but the relevant question is:  can Cindy Hyde-Smith's quote be as easily demonstrated to be harmless when put back in its natural context? 'Cause otherwise, you know, you're just desperately tossing red herrings. 

The natural context was obviously a joke.  I don't think she's standing out in public with cameras on her legitimately musing about how nice voter suppression is, do you?

It wouldn't be the most extreme case of a politician's terrible ideas slipping out on camera.  When the context of the joke is, "oh isn't it terrible (wink wink) that these young Democrats are finding it harder to vote", yeah I can definitely believe that she would put the same thought in the inverse construction.  Nobody is smart 100% of the time.

And I'd also point out that to make your objection really stick I think you need an alternative hypothesis a little more detailed than "joking lol".  Specifically, is it that the idea of deliberately making it harder for Democrats to vote couldn't have been further from her mind when she was considering whether to vote for the policy, but it now occurs to her as a wonderful joke?  This this is the sort of thing Republican legislators find funny to joke about, but the same legislators would never consider actually doing it on purpose? 

Last edited by Final-Fan - 5 days ago

Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Around the Network
Final-Fan said:

1.  And if they were passing laws mandating everyone must hose down their trash cans in case they were at risk of catching fire, while doing nothing about electrical problems that caused several known house fires?  I'm talking about priorities and enforcement costs here. 

Again, there are already laws in place about the kind of fraud that's being alleged in N. Carolina.  You're alleging negligence when there's no indication that it's not being taken seriously.

People break the law.  This is not a revelation and my point all along.

I don't have reason to believe there are tens of thousands of such blockages for every fraud prevention, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised to learn that it was somewhere in the low thousands, and I am sure it's in the hundreds.  If true, would that be worth it?  If you had to make a wild guess, where would you put the ratio of voters discouraged from voting to fraudsters discouraged from frauding?

The information is incomplete.

2.  The ballots have to show up somewhere.  Why can't they more closely monitor these collection points for hundreds of ballots coming from the same place?

I assume they were dropped in any of thousands of public USPS mailboxes.  Most of which aren't monitored at all.  None of which are tracked from point of origin that I'm aware of beyond the post office it arrived in.

Good catch on the ballot harvesting being illegal, but it doesn't invalidate my point that the system didn't itself catch the fact that so many mail-in ballots went missing.  Perhaps it would have done so in time, but that's not the impression I had.  If that impression is correct that's an area of improvement.

My understanding is that they did catch on and were investigating the matter, even going so far as contacting voters who had absentee ballots but hadn't voted and asking them about it.  The state was not acting passively.

2-2.  "Voting fraud never happens" is a pretty gross oversimplification that I doubt any judges believe, even if some members of the public do.

The gross oversimplification seems to have gained traction in higher circles.



NightlyPoe said:

1.  And were all the blocked forms of ID not "usual"?  Unless this is the case I'm not seeing any reason to think it was coincidence.  

They were certainly rarer forms of ID and not uniform government issue.

I'm having a lot of trouble finding what forms of ID the law blocked; could you point me to your source or identify what those forms of ID were?  Even one or two examples will help if you don't remember everything. 

What I have found so far is that they: 
—eliminated same-day registration after determining African Americans benefited disproportionately from that service;
—eliminated high school pre-registration and pre-registration while obtaining a driver's license after determining African Americans benefited disproportionately from those services;
—shortened the early voting period from 17 days to 10 days after determining African Americans voted disproportionately during that period of time; and
—eliminated out-of-precinct provisional ballots after determining African Americans benefited disproportionately from that service. 

Now, it is not entirely inconceivable that African Americans in North Carolina benefit disproportionately from every service that makes it easier to vote; and that a voting law that curtailed registration and tightened voting-day requirements would therefore necessarily disproportionately affect them; however, the answer to that suggestion depends on facts that I have not been able to obtain. 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

NightlyPoe said:
Final-Fan said:

1.  And if they were passing laws mandating everyone must hose down their trash cans in case they were at risk of catching fire, while doing nothing about electrical problems that caused several known house fires?  I'm talking about priorities and enforcement costs here. 

Again, there are already laws in place about the kind of fraud that's being alleged in N. Carolina.  You're alleging negligence when there's no indication that it's not being taken seriously.

People break the law.  This is not a revelation and my point all along.

I don't have reason to believe there are tens of thousands of such blockages for every fraud prevention, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised to learn that it was somewhere in the low thousands, and I am sure it's in the hundreds.  If true, would that be worth it?  If you had to make a wild guess, where would you put the ratio of voters discouraged from voting to fraudsters discouraged from frauding?

The information is incomplete.

2.  The ballots have to show up somewhere.  Why can't they more closely monitor these collection points for hundreds of ballots coming from the same place?

I assume they were dropped in any of thousands of public USPS mailboxes.  Most of which aren't monitored at all.  None of which are tracked from point of origin that I'm aware of beyond the post office it arrived in.

Good catch on the ballot harvesting being illegal, but it doesn't invalidate my point that the system didn't itself catch the fact that so many mail-in ballots went missing.  Perhaps it would have done so in time, but that's not the impression I had.  If that impression is correct that's an area of improvement.

My understanding is that they did catch on and were investigating the matter, even going so far as contacting voters who had absentee ballots but hadn't voted and asking them about it.  The state was not acting passively.

2-2.  "Voting fraud never happens" is a pretty gross oversimplification that I doubt any judges believe, even if some members of the public do.

The gross oversimplification seems to have gained traction in higher circles.

2.  Hundreds of ballots showing up in a post office they would not ordinarily be expected to intersect with is evidence that closer scrutiny is merited.  A clever criminal might drop each ballot off at a local mail drop but you gotta go after the low hanging fruit. 

After a modicum of searching, I have not conclusively answered the question of whether government mechanisms independently found the issue or were provably on track to do so, or whether citizen activists alerted them to an issue they might never have found.  If you have found a conclusive answer to this, I would appreciate ti if you shared the information. 

2-2.  I would be interested to know what judges in "higher circles", whatever that means, believes that literally zero people in the United States cast a personal fraudulent ballot in the past decade. 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Final-Fan said:

I'm having a lot of trouble finding what forms of ID the law blocked; could you point me to your source or identify what those forms of ID were?  Even one or two examples will help if you don't remember everything.

Here's one.  Acceptable IDs were "driver licenses, special ID cards, passports, veteran identification cards, military identification cards, tribal identification cards, and driver’s licenses from other states for voters who registered within three months of the election".

Not included, student IDs, government employee identification cards, and non-photo IDs. 

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article219717240.html

What I have found so far is that they:  
—eliminated same-day registration after determining African Americans benefited disproportionately from that service;
—eliminated high school pre-registration and pre-registration while obtaining a driver's license after determining African Americans benefited disproportionately from those services;
—shortened the early voting period from 17 days to 10 days after determining African Americans voted disproportionately during that period of time; and
—eliminated out-of-precinct provisional ballots after determining African Americans benefited disproportionately from that service.  

You have not found any of those things.  You have found opinions that this is what happened and why they did it.

Now, it is not entirely inconceivable that African Americans in North Carolina benefit disproportionately from every service that makes it easier to vote; and that a voting law that curtailed registration and tightened voting-day requirements would therefore necessarily disproportionately affect them; however, the answer to that suggestion depends on facts that I have not been able to obtain. 

It would appear to be the conclusion everywhere.  It's the old joke.  The Washington Post headline: "God says world to end tomorrow; women and minorities hardest hit."

But, by all means, show me an example of a voting law being tightened up in the slightest without accompanying claims of suppressing minority votes.



Around the Network
Final-Fan said:

2.  Hundreds of ballots showing up in a post office they would not ordinarily be expected to intersect with is evidence that closer scrutiny is merited.  A clever criminal might drop each ballot off at a local mail drop but you gotta go after the low hanging fruit.  

The post office is hardly in a position to be aware of which ballots should and should not be in a mailbox.  They are neither a law enforcement agency, nor election officials.

After a modicum of searching, I have not conclusively answered the question of whether government mechanisms independently found the issue or were provably on track to do so, or whether citizen activists alerted them to an issue they might never have found.  If you have found a conclusive answer to this, I would appreciate ti if you shared the information.  

"Montgomery, 27, lives with her 4-year old daughter in a neatly manicured public housing complex named Twisted Hickory just outside of Elizabethtown in Bladen County. She said she gave her unsealed absentee ballot to the woman, believing her to be an election official who would turn the ballot in.

But she said two investigators later showed up at her house and told her it had never been submitted.

So she went to a polling place on Election Day to cast her vote in person."

And later:

"Election fraud allegations in Bladen County have been around for at least two years, which is when the state board asked law enforcement to begin investigating.

Another document released Wednesday by the State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement shows that it had begun acting on concerns about absentee ballots before Election Day. The document was a letter mailed to every voter requesting an absentee-by-mail ballot in Bladen County during the 2018 general election, warning that "only you or your near relative or legal guardian can mail or deliver your ballot to the elections office," and that "only you can vote your ballot." It was sent between Oct. 29 and Nov. 2."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/north-carolina-investigators-zero-absentee-ballots-unresolved-house-race-n944731

2-2.  I would be interested to know what judges in "higher circles", whatever that means, believes that literally zero people in the United States cast a personal fraudulent ballot in the past decade.

Are you suggesting that "voting fraud is a myth" is just something the plebs believe?  I don't understand why you're trying to drill this down.

Last edited by NightlyPoe - 3 days ago

NightlyPoe said:
Final-Fan said:

I'm having a lot of trouble finding what forms of ID the law blocked; could you point me to your source or identify what those forms of ID were?  Even one or two examples will help if you don't remember everything.

Here's one.  Acceptable IDs were "driver licenses, special ID cards, passports, veteran identification cards, military identification cards, tribal identification cards, and driver’s licenses from other states for voters who registered within three months of the election".

Not included, student IDs, government employee identification cards, and non-photo IDs. 

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article219717240.html

What I have found so far is that they:  
—eliminated same-day registration after determining African Americans benefited disproportionately from that service;
—eliminated high school pre-registration and pre-registration while obtaining a driver's license after determining African Americans benefited disproportionately from those services;
—shortened the early voting period from 17 days to 10 days after determining African Americans voted disproportionately during that period of time; and
—eliminated out-of-precinct provisional ballots after determining African Americans benefited disproportionately from that service.  

You have not found any of those things.  You have found opinions that this is what happened and why they did it.

Now, it is not entirely inconceivable that African Americans in North Carolina benefit disproportionately from every service that makes it easier to vote; and that a voting law that curtailed registration and tightened voting-day requirements would therefore necessarily disproportionately affect them; however, the answer to that suggestion depends on facts that I have not been able to obtain. 

It would appear to be the conclusion everywhere.  It's the old joke.  The Washington Post headline: "God says world to end tomorrow; women and minorities hardest hit."

But, by all means, show me an example of a voting law being tightened up in the slightest without accompanying claims of suppressing minority votes.

Thanks for the source. 

Are you saying that those facts that I listed are false?  Correlation may not equal causation, but it still equals correlation. 

Similarly, "without claims of suppressing minority votes" isn't the same thing as "without actually suppressing minority votes", and I'm really flabbergasted that you would make such an implication given your position in this thread. 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

NightlyPoe said:

2-2.  I would be interested to know what judges in "higher circles", whatever that means, believes that literally zero people in the United States cast a personal fraudulent ballot in the past decade.

Are you suggesting that "voting fraud is a myth" is just something the plebs believe?  I don't understand why you're trying to drill this down.

I'm suggesting that you're conflating "in-person voting fraud is grossly exaggerated in the minds of Republican legislators and the cost-benefit ratio just isn't there" and "in-person voting fraud literally never happens".

Or, to put it another way, if by "voting fraud" you mean "massive, widespread in-person voting fraud", then I retract my objection. 

Last edited by Final-Fan - 4 days ago

Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Final-Fan said:

Are you saying that those facts that I listed are false?  Correlation may not equal causation, but it still equals correlation. 

I'm saying that "after determining" denotes causation.  I am also pointing out again that it will always be the conclusion that anything affects minorities.

Basically, someone, somewhere in the North Carolina legislature asked for the information.  Something that I'm sure all legislatures do when dealing with voting as there are federal laws to consider when doing so.  You, and the judges on that court, took that datapoint and are treating it as a fact that it was used as the primary source.  And the supposed proof is that the laws affect minorities disproportionately in a manner described as "surgical" when they would have found the same thing no matter what shape the law would have taken.

Similarly, "without claims of suppressing minority votes" isn't the same thing as "without actually suppressing minority votes", and I'm really flabbergasted that you would make such an implication given your position in this thread. 

It was a simple request.  You seemed to have trouble fathoming that this is the default answer to all new voting laws designed to protect against fraud.  Please find me a single example where one went through and wasn't condemned on these grounds.

I'm suggesting that you're conflating "in-person voting fraud is grossly exaggerated in the minds of Republican legislators and the cost-benefit ratio just isn't there" and "in-person voting fraud literally never happens". 

I believe that you're arguing a point that no one is making.