6209
Comments (206)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
2
BeefChucker 2 points ago +2 / -0

The burden of proof for democracy is that the vote was cast legitimately. Mail ins would require verification with the voter to ensure they were the one who cast the ballot and their ballot was not altered. Right now these absentee ballots are nothing more than pieces of paper that somehow were marked and somehow arrived to be counted.

3
fauxgnaws 3 points ago +3 / -0

They'll say you can't prove there's no fraud because you can't prove a negative.

You can prove a negative - by excluding all other possibilities.

If you have observer verified, video taped everything from cast through counting then you've proven there's no fraud because there was never an opportunity to commit it.

This is easy with normal, plain elections. Show up, observe the polls all day, observe the counting. You can't 'find' a box of votes because there was never a time where the votes were out of sight.

The fact that they are sending votes unobserved to counting centers is in itself an attack on democracy.

1
BeefChucker 1 point ago +1 / -0

Exactly, you don’t know if they are even votes. Or just blank ballots they filled out from 9pm-4am and brought over.

3
CommiesAreLosers 3 points ago +3 / -0

That is why you reach out to these voters and talk to them. Fake voters tell no tales.

1
UpTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's how it should be, but truthfully, it's the opposite for us in court right now

1
BeefChucker 1 point ago +1 / -0

It can be demonstrated in court how to commit fraud. We can use the same methods to show manipulation of electronic records, fake ballots and dumping given the large time frames involved. If the fraud took place in span of 2-3 hours I think would be more difficult, but they had 2-3 days to commit the steal.