aggiehawg said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Sounds like it. I'm looking for a way that this would be bad. I don't see it. Private entities can still do private voter awareness campaigns and such, they just can't run it through the government entity. I think this is good.

---

Particularly through to the people SELECTIVELY counting the votes ESPECIALLY THE FRAUDULENT ONES. They were on CTCL's payroll, effectively.

---

FIFY Ms Hawg

Line Ate Member said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Sounds like it. I'm looking for a way that this would be bad. I don't see it. Private entities can still do private voter awareness campaigns and such, they just can't run it through the government entity. I think this is good.

---

I agree 100% that this is a good thing. I also know that if a law is passed to prevent one thing, a bunch of other "unforeseen" aspects from that law spawn. See The Patriot Act or No Child Left Behind.

I don't know what the left has in store for 2024, but the fact that they essentially bought this election tells me that they are for doing whatever is needed.

---

The patriot act was a disaster from the beginning, and those of us that valued freedom were against it then and now!

Wisconsin today. Haven't been able to listen to it yet. About possible decertifcation.



ETA: Listening now. Making a lot of promises about the evidence they will present today. Recommend taking some time to watch this when people have time.

aggiehawg said:

---

Wisconsin today. Haven't been able to listen to it yet. About possible decertifcation.

---

Sounds great so far (5 mins in)

Bomb to be dropped next Thurs 3/24 when Tru The Vote delivers results to Legislature.

Keeping some powder dry for now.

Going to fix this mess and desertification the electors.

Small victory today.

Nye County, NV, with 5-0 vote bans electronic voting machines, will start with secure paper ballots for primaries. First in America.

— Seth Keshel (@SKeshel) March 15, 2022

ravingfans said:

---

Small victory today.

Nye County, NV, with 5-0 vote bans electronic voting machines, will start with secure paper ballots for primaries. First in America.

— Seth Keshel (@SKeshel) March 15, 2022

---

I like this but how do you ensure they don't just create more paper ballots and manually fill them out in the urban areas where all the fraud occurs?

agcrock2005 said:

---

ravingfans said:

---

Small victory today.

Nye County, NV, with 5-0 vote bans electronic voting machines, will start with secure paper ballots for primaries. First in America.

— Seth Keshel (@SKeshel) March 15, 2022

---

I like this but how do you ensure they don't just create more paper ballots and manually fill them out in the urban areas where all the fraud occurs?

---

if they are "secure" ballots they will either have a watermark or an identifying barcode or both.

This is a big deal.https://t.co/1AJa1xhRkQ

— CJ Pearson (@thecjpearson) March 22, 2022

It's been clear to me for a while that the votes were overwhelmingly legitimate, in the sense that there were at least real voters behind the ballots (except for perhaps Nevada, given their anarchistic shotgun-mailing of ballots...), but the Zuckbucks paid for MASSIVE harvesting operations.

Since individual states approve of ballot harvesting, has the FEC ruled if they are allowable at the federal level?

Keegan99 said:

---

It's been clear to me for a while that the votes were overwhelmingly legitimate, in the sense that there were at least real voters behind the ballots (except for perhaps Nevada, given their anarchistic shotgun-mailing of ballots...), but the Zuckbucks paid for MASSIVE harvesting operations.

---

That's right - that's why there is no audit or investigation that would change the result. The votes match the count.

Now, if they went through every mail in ballot and went back to the person and asked them if they actually voted, then you would see that plenty of people had votes cast for them. Lots of stories like this:

https://abc11.com/nc-vote-provisional-ballot-voter-already-voted-what-is-a/7588117/

In fact, there were plenty of stories where people showed up to vote and someone had already voted for them. These people were given a provisional ballot to replace the other one.

It's the reason why vote by mail MUST go away or we will never have a fair election again.

will25u said:

---

This is a big deal.https://t.co/1AJa1xhRkQ

— CJ Pearson (@thecjpearson) March 22, 2022

---

He's such a scumbag SOB!

He'd never make a musketeer. It's all-for-one, and one-for one!

Raffensberger would have made an outstanding Democrat. I wish someone would investigate his ass, as I'm sure there's lots of Dominion bucks, or some such coin behind his political meanderings right now.

will25u said:

---

This is a big deal.https://t.co/1AJa1xhRkQ

— CJ Pearson (@thecjpearson) March 22, 2022

---

A big deal?

No sure how this guy is coming to that assumption, since it was Raffensperger and his office running interference during the live vote, and then fought audits until the courts forced him to comply, and it was Raffensperger's 'team" that allowed ballots to be destroyed, not sure hos Raffensperger heading up any kind of probe is nothing more than window dressing. Raffensperger is an Anti Trump hack that in my view culpable in the entire Georgia voting fiasco.

2020 Election Integrity: Georgia - Elections Board Grants Subpoena Power to Lizard King Raffensperger

To secure evidence into possible illegal ballot harvesting in the 2020 election. Yeah, fat chance. Where are the missing routers? Still missing?https://t.co/v6HH3QFehi

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) March 22, 2022

Watermelon Man said:

---

Keegan99 said:

---

Vote by mail is inherently insecure, as the identity of the individual completing the ballot cannot be guaranteed. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that the individual completing the ballot was doing so free of any coercion.

Due to these flaws, vote by mail cannot be made secure.

---

That is the claim, but it is used and trusted to be secure all over the world. What is is about North Carolina that prevents it from being secure?

---

"All over the world" in approx 25% of the world's countries with many countries having banned it after significant fraud cases. If it was so secure it would be much more accepted.

And there it is--Ohio and national Democrats begin to waive the white flag on redistricting. Republicans' persistence has earned them a shot at a 13-2 delegation in 2022--and a chance to redraw the map with a friendlier court system in 2024. https://t.co/xeqcIMi85t

— RRH Elections (@RRHElections) March 23, 2022

Stay tuned for "2000 Mules".

Cell phone data, security camera evidence, an army of people dropping off stacks of ballots at multiple ballot drop boxes that look almost like paper routes. Taking pictures of the ballot boxes in order to send in to get paid.

This is exactly what Keegan was talking about. A massive and coordinated ballot harvesting operation funded by Zuck. Unless you think these are just really nice people that are taking granny's ballot to the drop box, how can you trust these to be legit? Especially when signature verification, a safeguard that we were promised before the election when we were talking about issues with mail-in ballots was largely ignored in most states.

Keegan99 said:

---

It's been clear to me for a while that the votes were overwhelmingly legitimate, in the sense that there were at least real voters behind the ballots (except for perhaps Nevada, given their anarchistic shotgun-mailing of ballots...), but the Zuckbucks paid for MASSIVE harvesting operations.

---

Yep. This is pretty much where I landed I'm the first part of 2021. I think it also encapsulates people like Shapiros position on the issue.

Watermelon Man said:

---

Keegan99 said:

---

Not alternative at all.

I realize you like to think the process somehow masks those flaws, but it does not.

A simple thought experiment is all that's necessary.

If I receive, say, a senile family member's ballot at my home, fill it out, and submit it, complete with a reasonable signature (since I know what it looks like) and other identifying information (since I have access to all of that), then how can the election authorities possibly know that it was I, not my family member, that completed and submitted the ballot? The family member, being senile, would be wholly unaware.

The inability to protect against that scenario - and countless others - is why the process is inherently insecure. The controls are inadequate since the ballot is unmonitored.

A secure process does not just work the overwhelming majority of the time. It is not just assumed to be ok if there are no reported problems. No, it must be bulletproof, so that a nefarious actor is plainly unable to abuse it.

Voting by mail has gaping holes ripe for exploit.

---

This is just the smoke and mirrors stuff that the whole BIG LIE is based on.

How many of these kind of shenanigans do you think are going on? Is there any reason to believe it is primarily one-sided? If you had any evidence that this actually occurs, why do you have to keep playing these "but, it COULD happen" games instead of laying out the evidence?

Sure, the system is not bulletproof. There is no way to make it bulletproof and still have it be fair to all people. Our representative democracy (or, democratic republic, take your choice) works because the leaders have to promote ideas that appeal to the majority of voters in order to achieve or remain in power. When you start to restrict the number of voters, it doesn't take long for the ideas of the leaders to no longer represent those of the people.

The simple fact is that mail-in voting is secure and used in a large number of US States, the people living there like it (both Democrats and Republicans), and it is used to elect both Democratic and Republican leaders. You don't even try to refute this, but simply continue to whine, "it's obviously unfair, my guy didn't win."

---

What exactly are you arguing? Ballot harvesting is not a propaganda topic. It clearly changed the game in CA, and was deployed tactic in many other states in 2020.

There is no simple fact that mail-in voting is secure. You can't prove something is secure w/o a chain of custody associated.

"Sure, the system is not bulletproof." Fact, it is not secure. "Fair to all" what a load of BS.

Is there any reason to believe it is one sided?

Mail-in ballots are huge in large urban areas. Urban areas are overwhelmingly democrat led.

Watermelon Man said:

---

Keegan99 said:

---

Not alternative at all.

I realize you like to think the process somehow masks those flaws, but it does not.

A simple thought experiment is all that's necessary.

If I receive, say, a senile family member's ballot at my home, fill it out, and submit it, complete with a reasonable signature (since I know what it looks like) and other identifying information (since I have access to all of that), then how can the election authorities possibly know that it was I, not my family member, that completed and submitted the ballot? The family member, being senile, would be wholly unaware.

The inability to protect against that scenario - and countless others - is why the process is inherently insecure. The controls are inadequate since the ballot is unmonitored.

A secure process does not just work the overwhelming majority of the time. It is not just assumed to be ok if there are no reported problems. No, it must be bulletproof, so that a nefarious actor is plainly unable to abuse it.

Voting by mail has gaping holes ripe for exploit.

---

This is just the smoke and mirrors stuff that the whole BIG LIE is based on.

How many of these kind of shenanigans do you think are going on? Is there any reason to believe it is primarily one-sided? If you had any evidence that this actually occurs, why do you have to keep playing these "but, it COULD happen" games instead of laying out the evidence?

Sure, the system is not bulletproof. There is no way to make it bulletproof and still have it be fair to all people. Our representative democracy (or, democratic republic, take your choice) works because the leaders have to promote ideas that appeal to the majority of voters in order to achieve or remain in power. When you start to restrict the number of voters, it doesn't take long for the ideas of the leaders to no longer represent those of the people.

The simple fact is that mail-in voting is secure and used in a large number of US States, the people living there like it (both Democrats and Republicans), and it is used to elect both Democratic and Republican leaders. You don't even try to refute this, but simply continue to whine, "it's obviously unfair, my guy didn't win."

---

It doesn't matter if it is a Republican or a Democrat that is doing the fraud. They should ALL do the time, so that argument is out.

And again, for the 23548710918327 time. We aren't necessarily against mail in voting as a whole. We are against MASS mailing of mail in ballot to EVERY SINGLE VOTER. Mail in voting should require a valid reason. Otherwise, you can take yourself to a voting booth like every other normal person.

Mailing out ballots to every single person on the voting rolls is rife with problems.

1. People steal mail all the time. Someone in my family was convicted as a mail carrier stealing mail with gift cards and other things. There are stories from 2020 where the postal worker on the route just threw ballots in the ditch.
2. Does that person still live at the address in the voter file? I moved and didn't update my voter card, and had to do it shortly before election day. Who gets that ballot? I wouldn't have if it were mailed to the voter file. Does the person who gets it throw it away? Send it back? Very doubtful that the state would mail it back out again.
3. In AZ, they did signature analysis, and thousands of mail in envelopes didn't even have a signature, or a signature that didn't match the voter file. And they accepted them. I am sure this is not just in AZ.

Quote:

---

Sure, the system is not bulletproof. There is no way to make it bulletproof and still have it be fair to all people. Our representative democracy (or, democratic republic, take your choice) works because the leaders have to promote ideas that appeal to the majority of voters in order to achieve or remain in power. When you start to restrict the number of voters, it doesn't take long for the ideas of the leaders to no longer represent those of the people.

The simple fact is that mail-in voting is secure

---

You contradict yourself.

The identity of the individual completing the ballot cannot be guaranteed. That the person completing the ballot is not coerced cannot be guaranteed. The chain of custody of the ballot cannot be guaranteed.

That is, by definition, insecure.

Your confidence in Democrat operatives doing the right thing is simply mind boggling. This is like letting an unsupervised kindergarten class free in a candy store and telling them not to eat anything because that would be stealing. The problems happen in urban areas of swing states that are controlled and monitored by Democrats and their supporters. People that are ethically challenged and have zero fear of legal repercussions, because they know that the media, three letter federal agencies, and their local Soros funded DA will ignore their misdeeds because they're all on the same team. You have to be grossly ignorant at this point, especially posting on this thread, to claim that election interference is "A Big Lie". CTCL's interference alone is enough to show that the election was likely purchased by Zuckerburg. That's not even getting in to the media interference that was extremely unethical and had a huge impact on election outcomes. Given a fair election, Biden would have been crushed and rightfully so as evidenced by his disastrous first 14 months. Democrat policies are hot garbage and incapable of winning elections on merit alone. Propaganda, unfounded claims of Republican/conservative racism, and cheating must be implemented to keep the Democrats in power.

Quote:

---

Is there any reason to believe it is primarily one-sided? If you had any evidence that this actually occurs, why do you have to keep playing these "but, it COULD happen" games instead of laying out the evidence?

---

When designing a secure system, you do not wait for evidence of exploitation.

You anticipate exploits and build in controls to guarantee security.

Those from-the-ground-up considerations is what makes a system secure.

If simple thought experiments can identify gilded paths for undetectable exploits, then the system is not secure.