‘Ballot Curing’ Might Cost Lauren Boebert Her Colorado Seat
No matter what it sounds like the district will have a recount in the end.
Officials will not know the results for Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District until at least Thursday because of ballot curing and military and overseas ballots.
Incumbent Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert leads Democrat Adam Frisch by about 1,100 votes, which is 0.3%. If it stays that way, they’ll get an automatic recount.
What is ballot curing? From Newsweek:
Every year in Colorado, thousands of ballots are reportedly rejected for issues related to signature verification, like a missing signature or a discrepancy in the signature. Local officials then alert voters of the issue, giving them a week time to fix the problem and make their vote count.
The process, which is done in 23 other state besides Colorado, is called “ballot curing.”
Frisch said the district has to count between 3,000 and 6,000 votes.
However, some think there won’t be much of a change once all the ballots come in:
Matt Crane, executive director of the County Clerks Association in Colorado, and says don’t expect a big change.
“When a recount happens our experience here in Colorado is that this reflects that the original count was accurate,” he said.
Still outstanding are military voters and Coloradoans overseas ballots, many of which may have already been counted.
Crane explained, “Colorado has an electronic portal that’s direct to the Secretary of State’s office that allows people to vote electronically and send their votes back that way.”
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
We needed to get credible elections after the fiasco of 2020.
We didn’t.
The further people get pushed out by cheating, the less they are going to be willing to abide by the system.
The Republican Machine in a heavily Republican District is not cheating the Republican candidate out of the election.
Stop being delusional because reality has a way of reasserting itself. If we stick to horrible candidates campaigning on your vote doesn’t count and a hated figure (Trump) we will lose again 2024.
I am tired of losing.
What we need are good candidates who are going to make the voters the issue instead of Trump.
Oh Jesus you never stop.
Like President Trump said, they’re not coming for him, they’re coming for us and he’s just in. The way…
She’s actually a good candidate, an incumbent, in a very blue state
He’s always made it about “us”, as she did
Oh for heavens sakes costing us elections so Democrats remain in charge of everything is the definition of helping them come for us.
She is in an extremely red district where ALL of the machinery is REPUBLICAN machinery.
Her side controls EVERYTHING in that district.
Are you dumb enough to think that say Chapel Hill NC is red territory because Republicans swept the NC state house?
Or how about convincing yourself that Nashville Tennessee or New Orleans is deep red?
The Democrats have no power in this district.
I don’t think candidate quality counts one little bit, and I’ll point to the brain-damaged retard Fetterman to make my point.
Only ballots count.
If candidate quality didn’t count at all, they wouldn’t have kept him in the basement until the very last moment they could, when much of the electorate had already voted. They were obviously worried that some people who would have voted for him would change their minds, and undoubtedly some did. Just not enough. Had the debate been held earlier, more would have changed their minds, though there’s no way to tell whether that would have been enough either.
It looks like they were so dedicated to voting communist that they not only elected a retarded vegetable, they also elected a dead man.
A couple of things about this: they hid Fetterman for much of the early vote, so people mailed in their ballots unaware of the extent of his vegetable state. By the time the debate rolled around, a huge number of people had already cast their ballots. Oz was a poor fit for Pennsylvania, and it showed. Pennsylvanians are down-to-earth, hard-working people who are very locally-oriented. Oz was seen as a slick carpet-bagger who had no idea about anything to do with Pennsylvania. He was a horrible horrible pick from Day One, and everyone but Trump knew it.
More generally, while the GOP rethinks its approach to elections in this not-so-new climate, it might be a good idea to rethink the debate schedules and the whole concept of an October surprise. The debates need to occur before the first early vote is cast, and the October surprise should be moved to early September (since the first early voting starts in mid-September, or did this year, anyway.).
Point taken about Oz, but here are a couple of factors. I’m from Pa, and Oz tried for a long time to set the debates, but the Fetterman camp wouldn’t cooperate. I voted for Kathy Barnett; she was considered too extreme. I forgot the other candidate’s name. Anyways. An early debate would have put Oz over the top.
They didn’t cooperate because they knew Fetterman was a brain-dead pile of tattooed mush. Smart move, really, no? And yes, it may well have, but we don’t know that Fetterman’s clear vegetable state would have changed enough votes to slick carpet-bagger Oz who condescended to PA voters far too often (couldn’t pronounce PA parishes, whined about the lack of elitist “food,” and just didn’t get PA. At all).
Going forward, though, we have to beat the early voting thing by insisting on early debates, unleashing October Surprises before early voting begins, and etc. We know their tricks now (they’ll have new ones next time, of course, but they’ll use these same ones again), and we simply must combat them in real ways.
Willow,
That’s probably true which is why the Fetterman campaign didn’t allow it.
It’s also true that a candidate depending on a debate to turn around an election is running behind their opponent. Had OZ been ahead he wouldn’t have needed a debate.
Good point. That a Trump-picked GOP candidate even needed the debate that proved Fetterman was a walking potato does not speak well of Trump or of his political acumen.
And the dead guy that PA also elected? He was DEAD for almost a month before the election and they still voted for the communsit.
Voters may not have known he was dead; you would be mightily surprised by how many people pay zero attention to politics. Those who did know he was dead, probably just voted party and expect him to be replaced by a Democrat (which he will be).
So instead of the carpetbagger, they got the carpet.
Nice thinking, PA.
Heh. Nice turn of phrase!
If a dead person could be found to run in my district, I’d vote for him. Yes, he’d almost certainly caucus with the Dems, but it could only be an improvement over the mostly-dead “representative” that I have now.
Heh. (And I’m sorry your rep sucks. Mine is a Trump diehard, and I am happy with him. He puts America First, and that is what matters to me.)
Here is what Fetterman had
1. Total media support
2. Total big tech support
3. Total support from Academia
4. Total support from Cultural Institutions
5. Doug Mastriano dramatically dragging down the popularity of the Republican ticket
6. Donald J Trump a very hated figure inserting himself into the race further hurting Dr. Oz
7. Underwhelming campaigning ability by Dr. Oz (remember how well Dr. Benjamin Carson did at campaigning? Being a brain surgeon doesn’t mean your a great politician).
Sorry but we don’t have the institutions to be able to drag bad candidates over the finish line.
He also by the way had his basement where voters could imagine him more impressive than he actually was.
In the past, CO-3 has been a conservative district. Right up until the last gerrymandered reapportionment [which the Colorado Republicans were fine with]. The 3rd has consisted of for the last 40 years I have lived in Southern Colorado, the west slope and part of southern Colorado. Under the new apportionment, heavily conservative [not necessarily Republican, because the Colorado Republicans will not fight Democrats, but till now we voted for them as the lesser of evils] Fremont and Chaffee counties were moved into another district and a funny shaped hook around them has added Pueblo county to the district. Pueblo is the third largest city outside of metro Denver and has been heavily Democrat as long as we have been a state. It was a corrupt, Italian labor union Democrat county based on coal mining and ironworks, It is in the final stages of transitioning to a corrupt, Hispanic-Leftist county based on welfare and gangs, And it is in no way conservative, and neither is the overall population of the 3rd district anymore.
This was a set up by the legislature [both parties, the Republicans hate her because she fights] to get rid of her and make the district Democrat forever. The fact that she is winning is impressive. They officially have not been counting votes over the weekend. Unofficially, they may have been printing them. The vote count and margin you list have been the same since Friday afternoon.
A question that most people are not willing to consider, but it is something that each person must answer given our situation:
“At what point does a fraudulent electoral system with no integrity lead to the unavoidable conclusion that the government has neither legitimacy nor consent of the governed?”
Tick, Tick, Tick.
Subotai Bahadur
The gerrymander added Republican areas to that district. The idea was to make sure Republicans only took one district; it would be a safe Republican district but it would make sure all other Democrat politicians would be safe even in a red wave.
That gerrymander to be blunt makes this underperformances all the more unforgivable. This was a deep red district the state of Colorado just made more red.
Just curious, but what state do you live in and how politically active have you been?
Subotai Bahadur
A heavily Republican district is still at the mercy of a heavily Democrat Election mechanism.
Bingo
How does a heavily Republican county have a heavily Democrat mechanism?
The Secretary of State, and governor, are commie-marxist-democrats. Personnel matter, and there may people in place to support the corruption.
Normally, the county seats consider themselves the same as the big cities, and they vote democrat. And it’s not unusual for the bd of elections members to be chosen from that area.
I dunno, Milhouse, you tell me.
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors is one Democrat and four Republicans.
It’s a conundrum for the ages. A Siamese puzzlement.
But there it is.
Look at the State officials that the locals answer to.
Aaaaaaaaaand… here’s the answer we all sought:
Maricopa election officials launched PAC in 2021 to stop MAGA candidates
“It has been revealed that embattled Arizona’s Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer and Supervisor Chairman Bill Gates in 2021 started a political action committee to stop MAGA candidates….”
Everything involved in counting these votes is local machinery. Local Republican machinery to be precise. If she loses it is her performance. There are no Democrats involved to blame, unless you mean her opponent for being skilled at appealing to moderates.
“What we need are good candidates who are going to make the voters the issue instead of Trump.”
Solid, proven statesmen. Like Uncle Festerman. Brandon. Kamalahaha. Hellfire Warnock. Auntie Maxine. Hank “Man Overboard” Johnson. Marion Barry.
I’d trade them all for an army of NPCs who vote for every Republican on every ballot, and a media who remind them 100 times a day to do just that or else the world will end.
Just like the Democrats have.
If only.
At the risk of repeating the Democrats have the following
1. Every institution in the United States government including the military actively helping push their party narrative
2. The entire corporate media
3. Big tech (this is big because big tech uses censorship)
4. The entire cultural establishment
5. Almost all of Academia giving them support
6. The mainline protestant churches
I could go on with more institutions that help Democrats but I think I made my point.
We need impressive candidates to make up for the Democrats endless advantages. They have the endless advantages.
Republicans could run Jesus Christ against Mayor Groot, and Groot would win.
Wrong. Republicans can and do win. The key is to remove the Trump factor. Evidence: Florida, New York.
Trump living on hear head rent free Fuzzy! Maybe pull your head out of your ass for a second so you can breath and realise that without OMB all you will end up with are endless Democrats parading as Republicans and then suddenly it will be the old “how come we dont have republicans anymore”.
But no…blame trump. The lazy mans complaint.
Uh, wasn’t the key removed there the fraud factor?
Yep.
Across the USA, the election officials print 100 million ballots that are not mailed. They don’t mail the dirty (voters moved or died) ballots, because the election officials know they are dirty. Did you ever wonder what happens to those dirty ballots? Colorado publishes the number of people on voter rolls. Every county is Colorado has more people on the voter rolls than adults in the county. In every state, the election officials have to be sued to remove the dirty ballots. Why do they want to print all the extra ballots? Is it because they vote enough of them to tip the election? In Colorado, it is not hard to do that because they count the ballots they have before the election.
Affidavits from across country claim that the dirty ballots are voted. They send the dirty ballots to a voting center where they are voted as instructed. Then enough dirty ballots are voted to tip the election. It is easy to check, just tally the number of votes coming from a single address. If 4 people voted from an address that has only 2 adults, then some dirty ballots were used.
If an ID was required, there would be no ballot curing. The medicine is more deadly than the disease – they have gerrymandered the system so much as to make it rife with inconsistencies, inefficiencies, and open to even more abuse and fraud. That is the real issue – fraud and harvested ballots. It is not a candidate issue, it is harvested ballots, many of which are outright fraudulent. Having worked elections in New Orleans, I can assure you any name on the voter roster is a potential fraudulent ballot for Dems. They track chronic non-voters, register them and then vote for non-voters using ballot harvesting. Our elections had fairly stable voter percentages for over 100 years, never varying more than a percentage point or two – until Covid, when voter participation increased 22%. It was bullshit, the Dems inserted upwards of 20million votes since ID was not required and all ballot authentication measures were turned off for Covid protocols. Dems are now enshrining these rules because they dont care about votes, only ballots. They scour the voter rolls, mass produce mail in ballots, then harvest those ballots by the millions. Our system is one huge fraudulent selection, it is not a legitimate election, far from it. McConnell and the GOP has gone along with it because they realize Trump is a larger threat to them than to the Dems. GOP and DNC, along with the bureaucracy all working together to keep the gravy train rolling. Its a farce, sadly.
The “machine” is useless if you are pumping unfiltered garbage into its fuel tank. Eight states conduct elections entirely by mail (California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Washington), which means voters do not need to request a ballot, and instead automatically receive one. Notice a trend in that list (aside from Utah)? This (as Jimmy Carter once said) is a recipe for fraud.
Ballot curing is impossible without a live legal voter on the other end able to prove it was his/her vote and clearing up whatever the problem is.
The people doing the curing are Republicans who work for other Republicans, who voted for Lauren Boebert.
Colorado was one of the first states to start mail in ballots and it used Gerrymander to secure other areas of Colorado by Democrats by placing more Republican areas into this district.
Even when the district was a little bit less favorable to Republicans there has never been a problem with them winning with the mail in ballots before.
You have no proof of any fraud happening in the district, there is no Democrat machinery.
What there is is a highly controversial stop the steal candidate.
Do the elected officials (Republicans) actually control the vote counting, or do the career government workers ? Everywhere I’ve been in the last 50 years, it’s mostly Democrats that take government jobs, even in small towns that haven’t voted Democrat since the Civil War.
I hope the elected officials are closely watching the people they hired to do the actual work…
Slow that down a bit because it’s not generally applicable to every State. Alabama has very credible and very secure elections with all the markers of ballot integrity you could want. Voter ID, one day of in person voting, none of that ‘no excuse’ absentee ballot nonsense.
There are a number of States who have always maintained the traditional election day. Others have passed significant reforms post 2020 shenanigans to create a much more secure system.
There are those States where the d/prog have run wild in loosening up the opportunity for shenanigans. That’s where the fault lies for continuing perceptions of or the actual occurrence of fraud.
The Citizens of those States where the elections laws are loose or potentially subject to less than optimal ballot integrity are going to have to sort out their own house. Neither the Congress nor any particular Presidential candidate is going to be able to do it for them from DC.
Liberal Playbook: Delay and sue to blue. That’s been the way of the elections for decades.
Yeah, but we’re always so ready to fight the last war and so unprepared to detect the new theatres of operations.
This year it was the pre-cheat. Send shitloads of “war” money to Volodymyr’s Bank and Laundry, have them “invest” great wheelbarrows of it in crypto, then have the crypto geek burn himself “stealing” all the money and donating it to Democrat campaigns, after which he runs away to a life of Mojitos on the beach.
And next cycle it will be something equally as inventive and unexpected.
Cleaning up the voter registration rolls is always effective. That’s the place to start for anyone concerned about their County and State elections process.
Hmm, Volodymyr sounds a lot like Voldemort.
Coincidence?
Essentially, Zelensky and Putin share the same first name.
I bet you’ve never seen anyone in the media point out that coincidence.
Next election cycle. You are an optimist.
Subotai Bahadur
It may be just a perception, but it seems that close elections fall to the Democrat. Votes “discovered”. “Cured” “recounted” go one way?!?
The Independents went Democrat. Independents are the people who determine election results.
We need to start appealing to them.
You’re correct, the appeal must be broad. I’m not talking about valid, legal votes, but those “found” AKA manufactured.
Yes, but we’re not talking about “found” votes. We’re talking here about genuine votes that came in the mail, or from the military, and the fact that almost half the states say that if an error is found they should not just throw the vote away but should notify the voter and allow them to fix it. If they do, that proves they are the genuine voter, and it is not a fraudulent vote. If the voter doesn’t exist, or didn’t vote, then they will not be able to cure the error the fraudster made. And in the case of a living person who didn’t vote, they’ll get an alert that someone voted in their name, and they can make a complaint about it.
“found” votes.
Whatever, buttercup. They say those military ballots, or ballots with irregularities. That’s the best explanation for why the ballots were sat aside, and left in Milhouse’s trunk, or closet, or backroom filing cabinet. If that helps you sleep at night, hang on to that. My guess is somebody guesses we need this many votes, so pull that many ballots.
Garage sale/flea market shopping tip….wear clothes with lots of pockets and varying amounts of cash. Negotiating, seller wants $4,and pull out $3. On the other hand, they want $4 and you pull out a fiver, and you can’t plead “All I have is….”
It means a human incorrectly filled out the ballot and or supporting docs. It doesn’t mean the person filling in the ballot was the person the ballot is for. See Nursing homes.
Nor does it mean the ballots that were mailed out were derived from an accurate and up to date voter registration list.
Wouldn’t the objective be to prove that the voter is the voter at the time of voting, and spare us all this falderal?
A single voting day, with cleaned, up to date voter rolls and secured ballots (maybe numbered or secretly marked), verified and witnessed absentee ballots and maybe dyed thumbs would be the way to fix this.
No “found” ballots, period. If they could not be handled properly, with full chain of custody and tallies, they should be discarded.
Why is this so hard, unless it is deliberate, which I fully expect.
I would like some review of the ballots democrats want to cure. Maybe its me but I just don’t think they’re quite honest.
The ballots in question here are ones known to have been turned in by real people with some kind of error that is being double checked to make sure it is legit before being counted. It shouldn’t matter in the district in question, it is the candidate that has made it relevant (this district really shouldn’t be in play). They have not been “discovered”.
Maybe the “error” is deliberate; I never give a vote to someone running unopposed, particularly a Democrat. They don’t need it. My ballot does not need curing, “adjudication,” or any attention other than counting the votes I made.
The GOP needs to start going into Nursing Homes and Group homes with getting residents to sign their pre-filled out ballots next time before the Democrats get there.
I take no responsibility for that. Nobody has ever appealed to me, except perhaps Elizabeth Hurley and Michelle Pfeiffer.
I agree I have been critical of the current approach. I think you are wrong if you voted Democrat; and we could talk about why I think that and why you think it was the right thing, but I agree the clown show we put up for candidates didn’t even try to appeal to you and we need to acknowledge that is why we lost.
By the way if you are trying to think of good actresses you could see if Sophie Marceau appeals to you, don’t let Jussie Smollay fool you when French acting has writers instead of actors writings scripts themselves it is very good
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGz94gf51uE
Well, I didn’t vote Democrat, not this time, not last time, not next time, not any time.
By the way, it wasn’t me that gave you a thumbs down.
Understood and hope you get through to more people here.
You think those sought-after independants like inflation, rising crime, border-jumpers, high gas prices, influenza lockdowns, increased taxation and the general malaise of mediocrity?
Maybe cancelling college loans appealed to them. Or handling the Ukraine war, or ruining our military readiness.
Maybe having vegetables in office means they won’t have to eat salads…..
The Vegetables they have in office are not edible.
Vote HARDER!!!
Nah run candidates that appeal to the voters more than they repel voters.
Exactly. It’s not hard.
Nah run candidates that appeal to the
votersvote counters more than they repel voters.FIFY
No, we do not need to start appealing to them. Because that means Republicans would just be Democrats-lite. Hey! That sounds familiar!
No. We need to get going at evangelizing them for a return to Christian morals and American ideals. The only way to get votes that matter is to get the people to believe in the same things you do.
Anything else is just will to power. And that does not end well for free citizens.
1, Failure to appeal to independents means we lose the election. Do you need some form of basic course in logic? I didn’t used to think that course should be brought down to high school level but apparently you think appealing to the actual electorate isn’t needed to win elections……..
2. Stop the steal will never be accepted by the American voter and public. We either drop that or we drop having a future in this country.
We have two models. Be the party of actual principles (as we are in Florida) or we could be the party of Trump forever losing till the end of time as purple states turn to blue and we become more and more an irrelevance.
Sorry you have no regard for actual principles in favor of being purely about a prince.
It is not at all true that cured ballots go one way. If you think so it’s your own misperception. Allowing voters to cure errors on their ballots is simple fairness, and all states should do it. It’s the exact opposite of fraud. The voter has to come in and show that they are the real person, and sign again, just as they are allowed to do when they vote in person.
When I see that a voter’s’ signature is not like the one in the book, I always give them a second or third chance, because the fact is that people’s signatures change, and also people don’t always use the same signature. So I tell them “When you registered to vote you signed your full name”, or “you didn’t use an initial”, etc., and ask them to try to emulate that. Or I just show them the signature on file and say “Try to sign something like that”. (But they don’t have the signature in front of them when they are signing.) Usually they can give me something close enough. Only very rarely are they unable to do so, in which case I can’t let them vote.
So letting absentee voters do the same thing, in person, seems only fair.
If you’re not smart enough to follow simple directions and fill out your ballot correctly, you shouldn’t be voting. There should be no “curing” of ballots, especially since they can be selective about which ones to “cure” after having seen the contents.
Wrong. First of all, they have not seen the contents, so they can’t be selective. How can they have seen the contents when they haven’t opened the envelope?
Second, you cannot deny that people’s signatures change. When you vote in person you get several tries at signing properly. Tell me why an absentee should not be allowed the exact same chance? If they can’t take advantage of it that’s their problem, but at least offer it. Likewise with all these errors; they are all things that an in-person voter can fix. In fact in-person voters can even get a whole new ballot, if they made a mistake on their old one. Talk about “not being smart enough to follow simple directions”
They can see the party registration, though, which lets them be selective.
Or even without party registration, they know what precinct they’re “curing” for, and can work harder on some precincts than others.
Part of the problem here is we have too much data available, which allows very targeted cheating.
We need redesigned systems that are transparent, and can’t be gamed. I might start by insisting that all democrat majority precincts be counted by Rs, and all republican majority precincts be counted by Ds.
All precincts, of any kind, are already counted by both parties equally.
It has never taken me more than one try to sign my own signature. Besides, I show photo ID, so they already know who I am before I sign. Plus, they can pretty easily figure out which way a ballot is likely to lean based on the zip code it comes from, so don’t give me that crap. This “curing” bullshit is pure election fraud, plain and simple.
Me, either, though I always kind of hold my breath because my signature is what it is. And no, it’s not easy to figure out how a voter will vote based on their party designation, especially in closed primary states. I’m a Republican, but when I lived in MA–a closed primary state/commonwealth–for over a decade, I registered as a Democrat. It was the only way to vote for the least crazy leftie lunatic. When generals rolled around, I voted (R).
And a lot of registered R’s this time around voted for D’s . . . Trump and abortion, seem to be the main reasons.
There are Democrat voters who vote blue no matter who and Republican voters who vote red regardless, but these are the bases of the parties, not the people who actually decide elections these days.
Like when they were covering the counting areas with cardboard or carrying out counting when the ballot counting area was supposedly closed, a la 2000? Or kicked out Republican observers, or made them sit so far away they could not properly observe the counting?
When you vote in person you get several tries at signing properly.
Ummmm, if there’s signatures involved, you certainly shouldn’t be allowed to attempt your forgery multiple times.
And an absentee voter can get a new ballot, too, if they screw theirs up.
But, once that ballot is submitted? Heck no!
(BTW, you can NOT get a new ballot if voting in person once you have submitted it. Only up until the time you actually put it in the scanner/drop it in the box/push the submit button on the screen. After that, you’re done. Get your sticker and move on.)
BINGO. Give this man a Prize!
At the polling place, we signed on a small touchscreen at a ridiculous angle such that there’s no way you could sign that would resemble anything you did on paper. But we also have to show valid ID, so touchscreen only verifies that you’ve voted after your identity has been verified otherwise.
Ah, you live in a reasonable state. In NY the only security is the signature, so it’s important that they at least get that right. If the signature doesn’t look anything like the one on file then we are not supposed to allow them to vote. And at least in my experience that is what happens. My D counterparts always agree and don’t allow people to vote if the signature is completely different.
Still, you’ve just made the case for curing even stronger. If the signature is only to verify you’ve voted, then it’s less important that it be correct, and therefore why shouldn’t the voter be allowed to cure it?
Maybe for the same reason we don’t (for the moment) allow people to go back and change their votes ex post facto because they “want to go with the winner,” or even an October surprise (for early/mail in).
Vote on voting day, with the information at hand. No Mulligans.
Signature on a mail-in ballot is actually for identification. Because you can’t very well identify where that ballot came from any other way.
That’s the problem with mail-in ballots: there is NO chain of custody. And “curing” them can allow fraud to simply strengthen its hand.
It’s why I’m an advocate of every vote being made in-person. Even military overseas. (That really should be one of the things an embassy does. In the case of military, embassy officers should travel to the bases for in-person absentee voting.)
This is true. My own signature is always full (includes my middle initial), but it’s little more than a scrawl, and it’s hard for me to scrawl on these electronic pads especially when the stylus has a squishy nubby thing on the end. Even on paper, my signature is never identical twice. It’s always me, and it’s clear it’s me, but it’s not the exact same scribble every time.
The GOP needs to update their playbook. Early voting and vote by mail have changed the rules of the game, and their GOTV efforts have to reflect that.
Unless you “fortify” those ballots like the Dems… early voting fails.
But we need to get in position of power to get rid of it or we will never win again
So the answer is “Learn2Cheat” … nice.
No, he didnt’ say that. Republicans need to gear their GOTV effort to the new reality. If you focus your entire GOTV on election day, you’re missing half of the action
Yes, he did, just not in so many words.
No, the answer is to learn to play in the legal framework that has been established over the last few cycles. Where ballot harvesting is legal, we need to be better at it. Ditto all the other legal things the Dems are doing to great effect.
Ballot-harvesting, mail-in voting, and drop boxes irreparably break the chain of custody for ballots. Any election using these methods is automatically suspect.
Those mechanisms won’t matter much unless your goal is to spend days after elections fabricating ballots because you have intentionally broken chain of custody and can’t be caught.
When your legal frame works is designed to make fraud easier than honesty, it’s a Kobayashi Maru.
And the inevitable Harry Reid statement, “Well, it worked, didn’t it?”
But the ballot harvesting works for the Dems, at least partly, because they’re using it to cheat.
/This.
I till we do away with it right now it’s ridiculous
All of the credit for the Democrats’ excellent election performance goes to Joe Biden.
Obama had such a low approval rating that he got shellacked during his first mid-term election. But Biden, mental genius that he is, has an approval rating that is so damned high he did better on the mid-terms than any other president in recent history.
And don’t forget Fetterman, when peole c/o our candidates, think Fetterman, the dead guy, and Hobbs
Yeah, Good Ole Uncle Fetterman. What a likeable guy.
By the way, it wasn’t me that gave you a thumbs down.
Lol I think I know who
Well, that is in keeping with his “spectacular” 2020 numbers.
Y’all believe that independants swung the election?
Psssh.
I’m still reeling from the claim that abortion was the #1 issue on the minds of 35-50yo suburban women.
It may well have been, for a lot of them. To a lot of persons (I’m not a biologist) in that demographic the “right” to an abortion is a matter of religious doctrine. They’re just like single-issue 2A voters; it overwhelms every other issue, and it doesn’t even matter whether they are ever likely to get one themselves. To them the “right” to abortion is a symbol for their freedom, and suppressing that “right” stands for suppressing the entire female rights movement and turning females into chattel. And they didn’t reason themselves into that position, so there’s no reasoning them out of it.
I agree. We don’t understand these single issue abortion voters anymore than the d/prog understand single issue 2A voters. Both groups are passionate and motivated. Both can swing close elections.
I don’t want to understand people who are that immoral.
That’s why we lose. We HAVE to understand–not agree with, just understand–the opposition, or we are just tilting at windmills.
Fuzzy, I don’t care to understand people that evil and immoral. All I wish them is a long, painful desth.
Milhouse just about nails it on this one.
Understand that Progressivism is NOT a political position. It is a religion. It looks a bit like Christianity (by design, and it is a Christian heresy) so lots of people will deny they are Progressive. Also, since they have spent a century or more denying that Progressivism is a religion (because it’s “reason-based” and that can’t be religious, right?) so very many refuse to see it as such. But their beliefs are almost entirely received wisdom, from certain classes of people (often called ‘experts’). And they orient on an utopic ideal which can be reached if we all just go along.
This is why I keep saying that we can’t count on “appealing to voters” and actually get ‘conservatives’* into office. We have to convert these people back to the principles that built this country – Christian morals and American ideals.
(* I don’t like that label, as it is wrong in so many cases. But it’s what I have to work with.)
Thank Lindsey Graham.
Who is, AT BEST, an idiot, that is if you believe he suddenly felt so strongly about abortion after never introducing a single bill in his entire career, to suddenly try to introduce an insanely radical bill that he KNEW would never pass a Republican Senate, much less a Democrat one.
Yes! It was so transparent…
And McCarthy.
Trump-endorsed McCarthy.
Indeed he did which makes one wonder how deep the commitment to draining the swamp actually runs.
No serious person can say that McCarthy isn’t a creature of the establishment nor that his tenure in leadership was at all successful. It’s time for a change.
Yep, all GOP leaders have to go: Trump, McConnell, McCarthy. They are the leaders, and they lost this election. Buh-bye.
Trump is not serious about draining the swamp, never was. One of his first declarations as president was that he would not allow the DOJ to pursue charges against Hillary because he wanted her to “heal.” It just went downhill from there. He also backed McConnell for Senate Majority Leader early on, and McCarthy, of course, to this day.
He backed Fauci and Birx long after GOP governors rejected their “science” and did what was right for their states.
He appointed Chris Wray to head the FBI which is now tracking down ominous grannies who oppose abortion and scary traitors who have a LEGO set of the Capitol, unassembled, in their closet. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a politician with worse political instincts than Trump.
Good lord. Get a clue.
Trump wanted to take the country on a path to improvement, which is exactly what he did, the greatest economy in 70+ years.
A contentious battle with Clinton would only have distracted from that, and THAT was the most important thing. Politicians like the clintons literally get away with murder. And the apparatus will do nothing to stop them.
Same thing with endorsing people he knows damn weel don’t have the country’s best interests in mind. He hoped to co-opt them into working for the country and once again –
We know the end result. You keep ignoring this and acting as though Trump was a failure.
You don’t want a great America apparently.
“One of his first declarations as president was that he would not allow the DOJ to pursue charges against Hillary because he wanted her to “heal.”
The woman from the song, bringing the frozen snake inside to warm it up.
OK.
I realize everything’s been jumping around in the overall thread.
And jumping around in a lot of its subthreads, including this one.
Enough to confuse everyone.
Enough to frustrate everyone else.
Among other things, I keep seeing retroactive condemnation of Donald Trump’s political judgment.
I don’t even have an objection most of these slams at Trump’s political judgment. I still wonder, after all this time, whether it was Chris Christie who talked Trump into appointing Christopher Wray. Doesn’t matter who it was, Trump should never have listened.
But just how far (and how far back) is this line of argument intended to reach?
Are readers of LI now to conclude that Impeachment 1 against Trump was merited?
Or that, if #1 was somehow not, Impeachment 2 against Trump definitely was?
I hadn’t thought that LI supported either attempt to remove Trump from office by impeachment.
But a contributor to LI has now taken Trump’s support for a primary opponent to Peter Meijer (late of MI-03) as an instance of Trump’s all-around toxicity and as the sole cause of a Democrat winning MI-03 in 2022. Meijer apparently should have been forgiven for voting for Impeachment 2.
So if Trump was always, already, permanently, as horrible and as useless as a comment in the present subthread implies, why shouldn’t he have been impeached and removed? How could any decent Republican running for Congress ever have supported Trump?
Seems like there are lots of rabbit holes opening up.
Maybe if everyone slows down, even just a tad, fewer of us will end falling into one.
Further, let’s suppose that Donald J. Trump is now, ever was, and ever shall have been, a man of bad political judgment. Further, that he has for some considerable period of time been degenerating into a man of wholly toxic political judgment.
Does it follow that taking him out of the 2024 presidential race via indictment, trial, and conviction, on whatever federal charges Merrick Garland cooks up, will be a good thing?
After all, such indictment, trial, and conviction will have been intended to eliminate Donald J. Trump as a political influence.
And the elimination of Donald J. Trump as political influence is, and from now on will have been, a good thing.
Rabbit holes…
His current endorsement of McCarthy following the continued failure to achieve electoral success or legislative success during McCarthy’s tenure as leader is frankly baffling.
Endorsing McCarthy for a continued leadership role as potentially the next Speaker is rewarding failure.
McCarthy has had a long time and frankly too many chances to prove he could deliver results. It’s time for him, McConnell and Rona McDaniels to go.
Clean sweep. They are ineffective at best and deliberately harmful at worst.
The solution to all of this nationwide nonsense is to eliminate mail-in-voting except for those overseas military members and electronic tabulation. I sure don’t remember the United States of America having no idea who their elected officials were until mail-in-voting became widespread. Furthermore, we didn’t have the when we pulled a lever to close the curtain on the voting booth, indicated our preferences with mechanical “switches” and pulled the lever to register our vote AND exit the booth. These recent “advances” aren’t; they make cheating easier.
That’s not going to happen, so we have to live with and adapt to the reality. Some states have chosen to eliminate early voting (I think two?), but most have it in some version.
Each state makes its own laws on this, so if you want the law changed in your state, get to work.
Not “Early” voting (While my preference is that it goes away to, I agree in that it probably won’t), but: *In Person* and *In Private* voting. Fraud is the whole reason we went to the Australian ballot in the first place.
The Republicans finally make headway on proof of Identity (ID Cards) and all of a sudden they’re harvested by third parties?
Really?
Yep, really. That’s what’s happening. We either work with it where it’s legal, or we keep losing until we somehow get laws changed in these states, which will be difficult to do if we can’t win because we are stuck in the ’80s.
Early going, short window I’m
Ok, mail has got to go
I couldn’t agree more, gonzo. The problem, of course, is that this is decided state by state. I think there should be ONE Election Day, with absentee ballots for the military and infirm. But that’s not what we have, so I don’t think it’s helpful to tilt at windmills. We have to deal with things as they are, not the way we wish them to be.
This was kind of the lesson I took away from the Tea Party’s rise and fall (and later morph into MAGA). Me? I would shut down pretty much every alphabet agency, pretty much every single Department of . . . (education, homeland defense, labor, and on), and do some serious cutting and reshuffling in others (DOJ, DOT, IRS, etc.). But that’s my wishlist. It’s not going to happen. So I deal with what IS doable, and hope that one day we can really down-size government (and with that, neutralize or destroy the deep state). That one day won’t happen in four or even eight years. It took us a century to get here, and it will take at least that long to get out (though probably longer).
Each State sets their election laws and mechanics. This is an issue that must be solved in the States that went wild with absentee voting by the people in those States who oppose it. They are literally the only people who can do it. A r POTUS and a r Majority in both houses of Congress can’t fix it for you.
Which is a damn good thing because it means the d/prog can’t do it in reverse from DC to try and shaft the many States where we fought off these attempts to weaken ballot security and elections integrity.
“Curing”, just another form of election fraud. Once you turn that ballot in, you are done and if you’re not smart enough to fill it out correctly then it should be discarded.
If they ran college like that, way back when, I’da hadda doctorate.
In brain surgery.
“Curing” is absurd, and it should be banned in every state.
Does the “curing” process include any sort of audit to ensure that it’s as benevolent as they claim?
Of course. It’s run by the same bipartisan panels that decided not to count these votes in the first place. If they wanted to cheat they would just admit the vote and move on. Instead they agree that the signature doesn’t match, or the date is wrong, or whatever the problem is, and the vote can’t be counted, but the voter should be notified and be given a chance to fix it. This is not some mysterious arcane thing.
There’s already no trust in the process, so let’s make it look even more crooked.
But if they had positive ID in the first place, wouldn’t it be unnecessary after the fact?
We need to bring back the grown ups in these comment sections.
When you rant and rave about cheating without any evidence whatsoever you undermine legitimate challenges to election fraud.
Elections are guilty, until proven innocent.
You have the burden of proof pointed in the wrong direction. Nobody needs to prove that there was cheating – people need to prove that there wasn’t.
Pretty much every other western has banned or severely limited mail-in voting for obvious reasons. Not so obvious to some here it seems.
*Western nation
I agree with you on restricting voting methods and upholding election integrity. There’s a difference between espousing these principles and throwing a tantrum crying about rampant cheating every time you don’t like the result. I hope that is obvious to you.
If an abusive protocol is condoned, it’s because somebody needs to abuse it.
That is just not true. Some don’t allow it. Some do allow it but severely limit it. Most do allow it and don’t limit it very much.
But we are not talking here about to what extent absentee voting should be allowed. We are talking about allowing voters who have already been allowed to vote absentee to fix errors they may have made on their envelopes, when it is possible and there’s no real reason not to allow it. In-person voters routinely get help with this; if they make a mistake the poll worker explains how to do it correctly. Why should absentee voters not get the same assistance, to whatever extent it’s practical?
They should even be allowed, if they spoil their ballot, to send it in before the election with a request to void it and send them a new one, just as in-person voters have always been allowed to do. So long as there’s time for the new ballot to get to them and back before the election is over. Of course nobody should be allowed to vote after the election. (Curing does not involve changing any votes!)
If a mail in ballot is spoiled, it should be required to be taken *by hand*, to an appropriate voting place. Just as is required for In-Person voters.
(If an *envelope* is spoiled, get the white out and fix it.)
If it is NOT fixed before it is posted, trash it. It’s invalid. Follow the rules.
Why should absentee voters not get the same assistance, to whatever extent it’s practical?
Why can’t they just vote in person, then? If it’s practical to “fix it” then it should have been practical for them to just vote in-person in the first place.
You can’t prove a negative. If that’s your position then you always claim fraud and be guilty of what the left accuses you of being every time.
We are all always guilty of everything the left accuses us of. Because the judgment is always in the hands of the left. It’s actually quite freeing, because once you are adjudged a deplorable, you’re free to be literally deplorable.
True, but that’s no reason to actually be guilty. We shouldn’t worry so much about what they accuse us of, but we always have to worry about doing the right thing. If we turn evil in order to defeat them, then what’s the point? Just let them win.
The truth is, if the voting was 100% transparent, we would have confidence. Voting on one day, with ballot marking devices plus handcounting gives us that transparency. Plus, of course, EVERY election worker should be wearing a body cam like cops.
We DESERVE 100% transparent elections. You hide everything, have machines malfunctioning like crazy, sign up nursing home dementia patients, have drop boxes where anyone can drop anything in they can get their hands on, citizens ARE ENTITLED TO DOUBT.
FIX IT, eliminate the doubt, then people won’t be making what some here describe as “unfounded” or “crazy” accusations. Clean it up, then we’ll shut up.
That’s a State level action. If your State elections laws don’t give you confidence then you have some work to do to fix them. No one can do it for you.
What’s 100% transparent look like to you?
I don’t see it as possible without open public records of everyone’s vote. That’s a non-starter for me and would lead to a different kind of voter intimidation (cancellation) by the left.
Semantics. “Prove that it wasn’t a free and fair election” is just as much of a negative as “Prove that there wasn’t fraud”.
The important part to realize here is that elections have a purpose – it’s not to figure out who the winner is, it’s to convince the loser they lost fair and square. When elections fail in that purpose, regardless if there was either systemic or acute fraud, the elections disrupt the very system they’re meant to stabilize.
Put another way, instead of complaining about the people who don’t believe this was a free and fair election, or scolding them, or insulting them, try to convince them, and persuade them.
If you find yourself lacking a convincing or persuasive argument, you’ve proven my point about how important election credibility is.
Have you seen 2000 mules by chance?
I just see a collection of asses on this board.
Then why not make it so transparent and verified that there is no possibility that someone could even think that cheating/fraud occurred? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. A reassured voter is a happy voter, and one likely not to be too disgusted with the process to sit it out.
Democrats seem to be invested in doing the exact opposite.
Let’s do as the Dems do: be triggered and start screaming at the slightest thought of cheating/fraud, and make them change through peaceful protest. Real peaceful protest.
Did you mean like all of those folks who have been locked up for almost two years for basically trespassing at worst? I don’t mean the ones that engaged in violence, I mean the ones who did nothing worse than walk through a door that was held open for them. I mean some of them that didn’t even do that, but they’re basically locked in a gulag by Merrick Himmler and his Gestapo.
Why is this all of a sudden a problem? Once upon a time elections were held on one day and the vote was mechanically counted. Took all of 30 minutes to tabulate the results of a dozen or so machines. Mail in ballots? Only if you were in service to the United States and on duty away from you polling station.
Never were any problems, except progressive Democrats knew they could not win that way. So now we “cure” ballots that do not produce the desired outcome.
By the way… can anyone name one federal election where the Democrat was in the lead when the polls closed and later lost on a recount or cured ballots?
Maybe Bush/Gore. Maybe. It’s so hard to remember who was ahead which time, and how many times. It was like a horse race in a Walter Lantz cartoon.
Bush was in the lead the whole time by a very few hundred votes. The Democrats in Broward and Miami-Dade Counties kept trying to fix the count by creative vote counting of the punch out voting cards they used. If I recall correctly, they were going to count cards where there hadn’t been a vote for President as votes for Gore, Another feature of the 2000 Election in Florida was trying to restrict the recount to heavily Democratic counties. As I remember, that’s what stopped the “recount” process because SCOTUS said a total recount or no recount at all.
Only if the rest of the card was a straight Democrat ticket. The assumption being that the voter must have intended to vote for Gore. Which is a bad assumption, because people do split tickets, and if the person did vote for every other Democrat but not for Gore they probably meant to do that.
No, Gore never led Bush in that race. Not even for one minute.
Will anyone be shocked when it’s back to a tie between Democrats and Republicans due to shenanigans?
No.
And Sam Bankman-Fried didn’t kill himself.
When it comes to crypto, Sam’s not much of a Bankman—his goose is Fried.
The House can’t be tied, because there’s an uneven number. The senate will only be tied if Walker wins, so for your prediction to be correct the Dems would have to be deploying shenangigans for Walker instead of against him, and why would they do that? Whatever shenanigans there are will of course be deployed for Warnock in the runoff, just as they were in the original election. Either they will be enough to make Warnock win in which case the senate will not be tied, or they won’t, in which case it will be tied despite them not because of them.
You took the wind right out of their angry sails. How dare you use logic and facts.
Health guy, you are turning into Ragspierre.
Yeah, no.
Yeah, yea.
Hard to get there I know, but close, very close.
I’m much better looking.
Might Skip have been talking about the Bobert/Frisch election?
It’s like Bush v. Gore in Florida all over again!!! Democrats were selective in their “curing” of ballots. My ballot was thrown out because I didn’t fit the leftist profile.
All I know is that the GOP leadership needs to be replaced from top to bottom
Especially Donald J Trump.
The counting, and recounting, will continue until there is a result showing the D is ahead. Then, a winner is declared.
Bingo.
Matt Crane like to purport being a republican. But, he worked directly for the Boulder County Clerk in 2020. Her name is Molly Fitzpatrick, and her previous job was executive director of New ERA COlorado… a vote data and harvesting operation started by Tom Steyer. NewERA has 30 full time staff and two data people…they know exactly where they need to get those extra votes. Crane and Fitzpatrick were at the University of Colorado Memorial Center in 2020 during election day watching New ERA volunteers =(cute girls and guys) wondering campus asking kids if they had voted. They walked them hand in had past the 100 foot mark and Crane and Fitzpatrick said nothing. I don’t know for sure, but I believe Cranes spouse may work for an election company…. NOT A GOOD SOURCE