General Discussion

SGMRTDARMY

(599 posts)

93. Your correct in that you haven't asserted fraud

Thu Jun 7, 2012, 12:08 PM

Jun 2012

My basis as to a fairly accurate and fair election is that it was very closely watched by poll watchers and the DOJ which sent observers down to WI. The only people claiming election fraud are some posters here whom have been asked over and over to provide proof of election fraud to which none has been posted, and the one poster who was very loud about it is no longer with us.

So far I haven't heard of anyone in the know in WI claim there was any election fraud. Were there dirty tricks played? Yes, and those should be investigated by the proper authorities, but as far as the results, I think they were pretty accurate.

Am I bummed out about the results? Yeah, I am but, absence any proof, I believe it's was a fair election.

Of course there's always room for improvement and I would welcome any suggestions.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

149 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Every election we lose is not because of fraud! [View all] Logical Jun 2012 OP

Great. Could you please show your proof? EFerrari Jun 2012 #1

The proof is on the voter fraud believers, not me! Prove fraud in Wisconsin! Logical Jun 2012 #6

Not really. Before you ask anyone to prove there was fraud EFerrari Jun 2012 #8

Wow, that's the same logic the Birthers use GarroHorus Jun 2012 #14

No. Birthers reject the state certified proof of live birth. EFerrari Jun 2012 #16

And you are rejecting the state certified election results. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #17

Hoisted by your own bad comparison. EFerrari Jun 2012 #44

Optiscan ballots exist with a chain of custody GarroHorus Jun 2012 #46

Chain of custody broken in Ohio in 2004, in San Diego in 2006, in New Hampshire in 2008, EFerrari Jun 2012 #98

I think that E Ferrarai's query is a valid one. truedelphi Jun 2012 #47

In the same way that innocence is assumed in a court of law, HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #49

You are comparing apples and hub caps. EFerrari Jun 2012 #51

No, he is not: you simply do not have the proof to offer that has been requested of you repeatedly. apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #53

the proof is that there is no proof. SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #65

This...and tinfoil hats... 414 Jun 2012 #121

Concerning this "long history of questioning hidden election results" HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #78

Wait, you and others on this thread are accepting a result reflexively because it was presented EFerrari Jun 2012 #82

Yes, we accept the result. HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #119

Poll watchers can't watch the tabulation and they have no way to verify it EFerrari Jun 2012 #132

We are in agreement that the audit needs to be done. HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #134

This is not a criminal case, there is no innocent until proven guilty in transparency matters Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #54

That's exactly right Scootaloo Jun 2012 #124

That is utter tripe. The default position of any scientist or computer programmer eridani Jun 2012 #126

There are right-wingers who think the results of the 2008 election were not valid. ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #102

Why would anyone be against transparent elections? EFerrari Jun 2012 #108

Absolutely he did ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #138

What was transparent about the 2008 election? EFerrari Jun 2012 #141

I know you think this is a clever tactic, but, in fact, the burden of proof is on YOU and others apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #52

Why should the burden of proof be on us? Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #55

Because there is a presumption of legitimacy of elections... Chan790 Jun 2012 #60

I am not asserting anything, those who say it is legitimate are making assertions Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #71

Provide evidence of fraud, or go away and cease embarrasing DU. It is that simple. n/t. apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #77

You obviously do not want transparency in government Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #79

Provide evidence of fraud, or go away and cease embarrasing DU. It is that simple. n/t. apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #88

How can you prove evidence of fraud laundry_queen Jun 2012 #95

Maybe, just maybe SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #96

Provide evidence of fraud, or go away and cease embarrasing DU. It is that simple. n/t. apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #147

Who knew laundry_queen Jun 2012 #148

LOL at your call for transparency... 414 Jun 2012 #122

This is nothing like voter ID laws Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #135

Elections departments should be required to present evidence about eridani Jun 2012 #127

Bad intent isn't even necessary for bad results. The software could simply be crap gkhouston Jun 2012 #131

And even if it isn't crap, screwups can still happen. eridani Jun 2012 #145

I know. All true and no need to prove it. But, L. Coyote Jun 2012 #56

The proof of validity rests on the people presenting the results. EFerrari Jun 2012 #57

No, proof of validity rests on the person asserting fraud. Chan790 Jun 2012 #64

I've been pondering just this question cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #72

Nope. I haven't asserted fraud. EFerrari Jun 2012 #81

Your correct in that you haven't asserted fraud SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #93

The problem with the idea that poll watchers or the DoJ watched this election closely EFerrari Jun 2012 #97

So we're right back where we started form SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #100

In this thread, we've determined that our votes are not counted in public EFerrari Jun 2012 #112

Horseshit. If I give you a lab report asserting that there are x parts per million eridani Jun 2012 #129

Prove the entire government isn't being run by lizard people 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #105

Try reading the thread. n/t EFerrari Jun 2012 #109

Any post in particular? 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #113

That's okay. I doubt they trust you, either. n/t EFerrari Jun 2012 #118

Prove it. 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #133

A nice sane post. Too many conspiracy theories here in virgogal Jun 2012 #2

Fine. Then please show me the votes. EFerrari Jun 2012 #3

If that's how you feel,so be it. virgogal Jun 2012 #10

It isn't how I "feel", but what I expect from an election. EFerrari Jun 2012 #12

He;s not an elections official, EFerrari GarroHorus Jun 2012 #15

The conspiracy theory is that you can know the results of an election counted in secret. EFerrari Jun 2012 #22

The votes in Wisconsin were counted PUBLICLY. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #23

Um, no, they aren't. You're out of your depth. n/t EFerrari Jun 2012 #37

Oh, yes they are. Take off the tinfoil. n/t GarroHorus Jun 2012 #40

Let's see. Touch screens cannot be counted in public. EFerrari Jun 2012 #41

Citizen Observers at every vote tally location GarroHorus Jun 2012 #45

The name you want is PeaceNikki. EFerrari Jun 2012 #48

Whatever could you mean by that? eomer Jun 2012 #39

Maybe the poster means that they looked at the machine totals twice. n/t EFerrari Jun 2012 #42

The machine is in a public place when it reports the tally? L. Coyote Jun 2012 #69

One election we lose due to fraud DOES = every election is suspcious I'm not going to forget Bush 01 uponit7771 Jun 2012 #4

It was in 2000. nt EFerrari Jun 2012 #11

We need to worry about both, actually Warpy Jun 2012 #5

With a system like ours fraud plays a part in... polichick Jun 2012 #7

You're far too, Logical. MineralMan Jun 2012 #9

Sadly, I think you're right about one thing. AverageJoe90 Jun 2012 #21

I was going to say sharp_stick Jun 2012 #13

Election fraud gave us Bush in 2000 and 2004. EOTE Jun 2012 #18

In 2000, it was a voter roll purge. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #20

Like it matters? EOTE Jun 2012 #24

There is a problem with the "Had the recount continued to completion" thing. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #26

He had to proceed with his most viable option. EOTE Jun 2012 #28

The voter purge was legal in Florida at the time GarroHorus Jun 2012 #29

So it's perfectly legal to remove legal voters from the rolls EOTE Jun 2012 #30

Yep, it was perfectly legal. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #31

Gotcha, it's perfectly legal to purge legitimate voters from the voter rolls. EOTE Jun 2012 #83

Apples to oranges, chief. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #84

The law said NOTHING about removing LEGITIMATE VOTERS from the voter rolls. EOTE Jun 2012 #85

The law gave the authority to remove voters from the rolls GarroHorus Jun 2012 #89

Nice citation there, chief. EOTE Jun 2012 #90

you know, your idiocy with the "chief" bullshit ends here GarroHorus Jun 2012 #91

Another brilliant reply. EOTE Jun 2012 #92

Lots of folks with right-wing talking points here these days. HiPointDem Jun 2012 #34

What right wing talking points? GarroHorus Jun 2012 #38

It's RW talking points because SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #67

Ain't that the truth. EOTE Jun 2012 #86

Wrong. Zoeisright Jun 2012 #144

Yes, Gore would have won had all the votes been ciunted. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #146

Right. You are delusional if you think that the Ohio county that eridani Jun 2012 #130

True, but if there are reports of such...... AverageJoe90 Jun 2012 #19

The problem is Citizen United, but not Election Fraud? RC Jun 2012 #25

Because it is legal! Remember? Logical Jun 2012 #27

We know Repukes will cheat. I think they cheat whether they need to or not. As far as I am concerned rhett o rick Jun 2012 #32

Right sure they should, ridiculous way of thinking. Rex Jun 2012 #33

Pardon me, but don't we need to be concerned about BOTH? What about Florida? Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2012 #35

Voter caging in Florida altered the national political landscape and impacted the world L. Coyote Jun 2012 #70

Certainly not at this margin - lynne Jun 2012 #36

In the absence of transparent elections, we have no way to assess the truth of your assertion. n/t gkhouston Jun 2012 #43

I haven't read one case on DU of someone saying every election we lose is because of fraud. Prometheus Bound Jun 2012 #50

Ding! Ding! L. Coyote Jun 2012 #68

Oh c'mon ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #104

OK, that's one election. The OP said EVERY election. Prometheus Bound Jun 2012 #107

I think you're smart enough to understand hyperbole ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #137

I guess I would classify it as a strawman rather than hyperbole. Prometheus Bound Jun 2012 #139

There was all kind of discussion of NY when they were trying to get rid of the lever machines. EFerrari Jun 2012 #116

So let's give the Republicans the benefit of the doubt.... meanit Jun 2012 #58

The problem is that we know it's possible 2pooped2pop Jun 2012 #59

I've seen that talking point alot today - TBF Jun 2012 #61

and you know that how? robinlynne Jun 2012 #62

So you are claiming EVERY election we lose is fraud? Really? Logical Jun 2012 #73

I can state that there has been fraud in every election since 2000. That I know. robinlynne Jun 2012 #76

Republicans can never win an election without stretching the truth. Jamaal510 Jun 2012 #63

Of course not but since elections are not transparent and worse the opposition owns TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #66

Post removed Post removed Jun 2012 #74

but that does NOT mean that there is never fraud a2liberal Jun 2012 #75

I must be really dumb lunatica Jun 2012 #80

We lost in WI because 70% of the voters oppose recalls either everytime WI_DEM Jun 2012 #87

I think alien abductions are a more pressing threat Capt. Obvious Jun 2012 #94

Then you didn't follow FL in 2000 or Ohio in 2004 or San Diego in 2006 EFerrari Jun 2012 #99

New Hampshire would have been an excellent test case. HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #120

Look, lets just face reality ..... oldhippie Jun 2012 #101

Too many on DU are like NBA fans ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #103

LOL. I remember arguing about this with my friends over 20 years ago RZM Jun 2012 #111

And yet the Election Reform forum doesn't shut down regardless of who wins. EFerrari Jun 2012 #117

We won in 2006 and 2008 ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #136

Actually, in 2006, Landshark was involved in a high profile litigation EFerrari Jun 2012 #140

Also, "Landslide Denied" was posted in Election Reform at the time eridani Jun 2012 #149

I am sure that many of the people claiming this is fraud because . . . well it just is 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #106

It just amazes me that SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #110

Ding ding ding... 414 Jun 2012 #123

You're wrong. shcrane71 Jun 2012 #115

It goes hand-in-hand. shcrane71 Jun 2012 #114

It has nothing to do with BIG money... meaculpa2011 Jun 2012 #125

I guess you meant to say "Not every election we lose is because of fraud!" Bonobo Jun 2012 #128

YES IT IS!!! crazyjoe Jun 2012 #142

ONE is too many. Zoeisright Jun 2012 #143