Florida Recount in Senate Race?

[Bill the Cat]

I think he means the electoral college vote.

Sort of. There are only 2 true "Federal" offices - President and Vice President. Every other one is a representative of either an individual district or a state.

[carpedm9587]

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

This site always amazes me. If you look at the data, it covers over 20 years, which means 10 election cycles across the country. So that's fewer than 120 instances of voter fraud per year in elections that have 120M votes cast in a presidential year, and over 60M in a midterm year (normally). So 240 instances out of 180M votes cast, for a demonstrable fraud rate of 0.000133%

No voter system will be perfect, but a demonstrable error rate at that level would be the envy of any manufacturing process, or even legal process. I'm sure the instances of tax fraud are higher. Murder certainly is. Auto accidents. Gun-related deaths. The list goes on.

Which makes one wonder - why all of the incredible emphasis to solve a problem that cannot be shown to be any more than "trivial?"

[Bill the Cat]

This site always amazes me. If you look at the data, it covers over 20 years, which means 10 election cycles across the country. So that's fewer than 120 instances of voter fraud per year in elections that have 120M votes cast in a presidential year, and over 60M in a midterm year (normally). So 240 instances out of 180M votes cast, for a demonstrable fraud rate of 0.000133%

No voter system will be perfect, but a demonstrable error rate at that level would be the envy of any manufacturing process, or even legal process. I'm sure the instances of tax fraud are higher. Murder certainly is. Auto accidents. Gun-related deaths. The list goes on.

Which makes one wonder - why all of the incredible emphasis to solve a problem that cannot be shown to be any more than "trivial?"

Because, as we can see in the past few elections specifically, a few votes can tip the balance.

[Sparko]

In an attempt to get even more liberal votes, DC is now trying to extend the vote to 16 year-olds. I guess they figure they can influence the kids easier while they are still in school.


Committee approves bill to allow D.C. 16, 17-year-olds to vote
If a bill heading to the D.C. City Council this month becomes law, 16- and 17-year-olds living in the District could be the first in the country to cast a vote for president in the 2020 election.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- If a bill heading to the D.C. City Council this month becomes law, 16- and 17-year-olds living in the District could be the first in the country to cast a vote for president in the 2020 election.

On Thursday, the D.C. City Council Committee on the Judiciary and Public safety unanimously voted to send the Youth Vote Amendment Act of 2018 to the full council. The bill would make D.C. the fifth city in the country to grant voting rights to 16- and 17-year-olds, and the first to allow voters under 18 to cast a ballot in federal elections.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/l...e/65-610309481

[Bill the Cat]

In an attempt to get even more liberal votes, DC is now trying to extend the vote to 16 year-olds. I guess they figure they can influence the kids easier while they are still in school.


Committee approves bill to allow D.C. 16, 17-year-olds to vote
If a bill heading to the D.C. City Council this month becomes law, 16- and 17-year-olds living in the District could be the first in the country to cast a vote for president in the 2020 election.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- If a bill heading to the D.C. City Council this month becomes law, 16- and 17-year-olds living in the District could be the first in the country to cast a vote for president in the 2020 election.

On Thursday, the D.C. City Council Committee on the Judiciary and Public safety unanimously voted to send the Youth Vote Amendment Act of 2018 to the full council. The bill would make D.C. the fifth city in the country to grant voting rights to 16- and 17-year-olds, and the first to allow voters under 18 to cast a ballot in federal elections.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/l...e/65-610309481

Not that I am a fan of children who lack the legal ability to consent to anything else getting to consent to their representatives, DC never has a shot at going Red anyway, so more liberals-in-training just serve to make it more blue than it already is.

[oxmixmudd]

Because, as we can see in the past few elections specifically, a few votes can tip the balance.

according to wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ection_results, if I didn't miss one, the closest race ever in the history of the united states was decided by 520 votes. That is 4 times the average documented Fraud per voter year across the entire US. And these are the closest races ever. So, based on that data, explicit voter fraud can't be considered a serious threat to any election where the margin is >1000 votes.

Jim

[Sparko]

Not that I am a fan of children who lack the legal ability to consent to anything else getting to consent to their representatives, DC never has a shot at going Red anyway, so more liberals-in-training just serve to make it more blue than it already is.

Yeah that is pretty much why I don't care here. But if it becomes a nationwide trend it could be a problem. Schools are already liberal training grounds where they brainwash our kids. Look at the colleges. This is just another attempt to gain more voters for "their side" - The college kids can't even name the vice president and now we want to let high school sophomores vote?

[Sparko]

according to wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ection_results, if I didn't miss one, the closest race ever in the history of the united states was decided by 520 votes. That is 4 times the average documented Fraud per voter year across the entire US. And these are the closest races ever. So, based on that data, explicit voter fraud can't be considered a serious threat to any election where the margin is >1000 votes.

Jim

Those are only the frauds we have caught though Jim. And the fact that it is going on at all is a problem to me. I don't care which side is doing it.

[rogue06]

Again - reputable news sources are saying "no problems" and the blog/conspiracy sources are screaming problems. I tend to lean to reputable news sources.

In other words, Rogue - you appear to be stuck on "fake news"

If there are no problems with this recount then would you care to explain why a judge had to intervene to put a halt to illegal practices?

[Roy]

This site always amazes me. If you look at the data, ...

There's your mistake. You're looking at the data, not guessing based on uninformed opinion, unverified anecdotes and blind acceptance of propaganda.

[carpedm9587]

Sort of. There are only 2 true "Federal" offices - President and Vice President. Every other one is a representative of either an individual district or a state.

Yeah - but while the election is held at the state level - the office is definitely a federal one. Ask yourself where the paycheck comes from.

[carpedm9587]

Because, as we can see in the past few elections specifically, a few votes can tip the balance.

Sorry, BTC, but that just is not going to fly. When we manufacture things, just one bad part can bring down an airplane. We don't insist on zero-defect for that purpose. The same is basically true of elections. Indeed, protecting against voter fraud perpetrated by those charged with counting the votes is far more critical because they can have far more impact. Races that are within a few hundred votes are comparatively rare - and that 120 per election is nationwide - so an average of fewer than 3 per state. That's just chump change.

[carpedm9587]

In an attempt to get even more liberal votes, DC is now trying to extend the vote to 16 year-olds. I guess they figure they can influence the kids easier while they are still in school.


Committee approves bill to allow D.C. 16, 17-year-olds to vote
If a bill heading to the D.C. City Council this month becomes law, 16- and 17-year-olds living in the District could be the first in the country to cast a vote for president in the 2020 election.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- If a bill heading to the D.C. City Council this month becomes law, 16- and 17-year-olds living in the District could be the first in the country to cast a vote for president in the 2020 election.

On Thursday, the D.C. City Council Committee on the Judiciary and Public safety unanimously voted to send the Youth Vote Amendment Act of 2018 to the full council. The bill would make D.C. the fifth city in the country to grant voting rights to 16- and 17-year-olds, and the first to allow voters under 18 to cast a ballot in federal elections.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/l...e/65-610309481

I have no idea if the supporters of this are "trying to get more liberal votes" or not. I know that there are movements in several states, many initiated by the kids themselves at the high-school level, to reduce the voting age. Here in Vermont, it turns out we have no minimum age for the governor's office, and a very articulate teenager ran in the last election. He is promoting a lowered voting age.

And, frankly, if 16-17 year-olds are likely to vote liberal today, then Reps have a far more serious problem. That suggests that the next generation is strongly leaning left. Liberals already seriously outnumber conservatives. If that trend continues. it suggests that the time when conservatives have significant political power is drawing to a close. Maybe conservatives should consider why it is that their message is being rejected by so many in the coming generations...?

[carpedm9587]

Those are only the frauds we have caught though Jim. And the fact that it is going on at all is a problem to me. I don't care which side is doing it.

This is a commonly sited claim - and it's entirely bogus. It translates to, "we can't see it - we can't prove it exists - but we have to spend enormous time and energy to prevent it - even if it means thousands of people who used to be able to vote cannot vote."

The entire argument makes no sense. Show the problem exists - then we derive a proportional response to the problem.

I will also note that the insistence that we take all these precautions, which predominantly impact poor and minority voters (who are known to predominantly vote liberal/Democrat) is the reason why the claim of racism is so often made. Personally, I don't think it is racism. I think it is a blatant attempt on the part of those on the right who support this to suppress the liberal/Democrat vote. With the right already outnumbered, if this vote cannot be suppressed by one means or another, then it will be increasingly difficult to win elections and causes. Gerrymandering serves the same basic purpose. BOTH sides do that one, though the Reps have proven themselves to be far more capable in that domain (i.e., operation Red Map). I would hope that, as Dems retake power, they will simply undo the gerrymandering by the leadership on the right. My fear, however, is that they will simply replace it with their own.

[carpedm9587]

If there are no problems with this recount then would you care to explain why a judge had to intervene to put a halt to illegal practices?

I have found one judge so far, who told the supervisor that the time it took for them to provide the campaigns with the counts and breakdown of the votes was too long. Do you have others to point to?