Do you know that Trump wants to nationalize voting?

[msc545]

“These people were brought to our country to vote and they vote illegally. Amazing that the Republicans aren’t tougher on it,” Trump said, falsely. “The Republicans should say, we want to take over. We should take over the voting, the voting in at least many, 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.”

What do you think about this?

[RavVid]

Being from a country with nearly complete Federal and State electoral rolls I can assure it is the only way to go. There should be absolutely no way a non citizen can vote.

The key to that objective is complete accurate electoral rolls.

If an immigrant is granted citizenship they are auto enrolled federally, and when kiddies turn 18 yo adults they are auto enrolled. Enrol in a state and you are enrolled on the federal roll and vice versa. Shift state an enroll you will be unenrolled in the former state. You can scam the system by staying enrolled in the former state but a new resident at your old address would be a flag.

It is not that hard. Some low level fraud is still possible but there will be police investigation even at low levels. Say someone goes to vote and finds they have already voted.

We take election integrity very seriously.

[msc545]

There has never been a documented case of voting fraud in the US that was of magnitude such that it would have changed the election's result. The reason that the right wing in this country is trying to enforce voter identification is because they do not want people who are not white to vote. Other comments about voting fraud are red herrings designed to make us afraid that voters will somehow, illegal aliens will somehow find a way to vote. That's not going to happen, if it hasn't already happened it will never happen.

[RavVid]

Well that is the litmus test indeed - could an alleged fraud have changed the result? Now I am not suggesting it does happen in the US because I have no goddamn idea.

More my point is an electoral system should be so strongly secure that no one - especially the losing candidates - consider fraud might have changed the loss.

The people, the system needs to convince are the losers. With the most favourable interpretation for the loser, it should be clear to the loser they did indeed lose. It diminishes all democracies if that is not the case.

[msc545]

It is mathematically too difficult to commit fraud in our elections based solely on the size of the electorate. The number of votes that a person would have to change or submit is too large and therefore expensive to be manipulated in the time alloted.

[RavVid]

That is a point. After our federal elections I analyse how many votes it would have took to reverse which party formed gov't. It is remarkably small. Like 2,000 vote in the right electorates to back out a landslide win one year. :)

[msc545]

Except you're cherry-picking the elections where that could occur and not paying attention to the many elections where it could not occur. That being said, having to alter 2,000 votes is not trivial.

[goaded]

In view of "an electoral system should be so strongly secure that no one - especially the losing candidates - consider fraud might have changed the loss.", I'd just like to point out that it was that secure.

The only reason anyone didn't believe it in 2020 was because "any information came in that would mean [President Trump] could no longer be President he would reject it. And any theory, no matter how far-fetched, no matter how not based in law, that would indicate that he could, he latched on to that. And we had — we were confident that we had very strong proof of that pattern.” (Jack Smith sworn testimony to House, p. 28)

He knew he'd lost, he just lied about it.

Earlier on the same page: "one of the strengths of our case and why we felt we had such strong proof is all witnesses were not going to be political enemies of the President.

They were going to be political allies.

We had numerous witnesses who would say, "I voted for President Trump. I campaigned for Trump President Trump. I wanted him to win."
...
Our case was built on, frankly, Republicans who put their allegiance to the country before the party.

And so the President got information from people he trusted on other issues.

He rejected it whenever it didn't fit him staying in office."

Later:
"Q. ... when you were talking to Mr. Giuliani, that he truly believed all the voter-fraud claims that he was putting out around the country?

A Our evidence was, he did not.

And, in fact, when we interviewed him, he disavowed a number of the claims.

He claimed they were mistakes or hyperbole, even the claim about Ruby Freeman, where he, you know, basically destroyed this poor woman's life by claiming she was a vote scammer.

President Trump did the same thing in a recorded call with the Secretary of State; he disavowed things he'd said in that interview." (p. 131,132)
judiciary.house.gov/.../...t_Redacted-w-Errata.pdf

[RavVid]

Oh yes, I specifically picked an election where there was massive 20 seat land slide. I was startled at how few votes underlay that. 0.01% of the total electorate and 0.05% of the voters in those 20 seats.

[RavVid]

@goaded Perhaps my arrogance is misplaced then :)

[goaded]

I can't see Aussies putting up with Trump-like nonsense. But then, I thought that about Germany and France.

[RavVid]

@goaded Sadly Trump caused an almost certain conservative victory to a Left win in House of Reps and Senate. So you are right.

[slatyb]

Yes, but fortunately the Constitution is clear that the states control elections.

[msc545]

I am not sure that is going to matter. The Constitution itself doesn't seem to matter much anymore.

[Anonymous]

I agree with you that Federal elections should be nationalized and there should also be federal ID to vote.

[888theGreat]

Well , he says voting I'd rigged but yet most red states use voter ID. Here in Indiana we do. I know Texas does. Republicans are claiming the Democrat that won in Texas won by cheating. Impossible because of voter ID.

[msc545]

See that's the problem that the wright has with this voter ID thing. On the one hand, it may keep people who they don't want voting away, but when the vote is finally counted, it is. How did I? Honestly it's very likely at this point that MAGA we'll lose anyway. When voter ID is in place and the right loses anyway. That makes them look even more stupid is than usual.

[CaptainSmartass]

How the fuck do you nationalise voting? Yet more evidence that he's lost his marbles...

Simples...

[msc545]

If I'm not mistaken, I think this is a euphemism for takeover voting.

[ProbablyClueless]

I’m not really sure what “nationalizing the voting“ would mean.


Both parties put forth national voting reform bills though. That, at least, is a fairly regular occurrence.

[msc545]

I'm not entirely sure what it means either in this context, but I suspect it means something like what is meant by nationalizing an industry, like nationalizing an oil company, in other words, taking it over.

[Sevenpointfive]

voter counts should be done by responsible people. we don't know who the hell is counting the votes or if the machines are making up numbers. after you vote, you might as well toss it in the recycling bin. i have zero confidence in elections.

[Staximus]

Yeah that's not going to happen, he's just talking out of his ass or trolling. He's a master at trolling

[msc545]

In this particular instance, I certainly hope you're right.

[beefcakebradybatson]

Just heard it on the radio, and more proof he's senile.

[exitseven]

having to show an ID to vote makes perfect sense if you want to reduce fraud.

[msc545]

There is no fraud. That's a continuing lie that you people use in order to have justification for trying to suppress the vote. It's not going to happen this time.

[exitseven]

Biden stole the 2020 election. Even many democrats secretly believe it. Democrats fight to keep fraudulent elections because that is the only way they can win.

[jamesgoldman]

We in the UK had all but no fraud but still got told we'd need ID to vote, no there's no fraud because every voter gets ticked off the roster when they are handed their voting slip

[exitseven]

@jamesgoldman in the state I live in the democrats in the legislature voted to give illegal aliens drivers licenses. The Sec of State comes on TV and says that all you need to register to vote is a drivers license. There is no way to tell if a person is a citizen or not. It is a system that allows cheating and once the ballot is inn the ballot box there is no way to tell if it was cast by acitizen or an illegal alien.

[msc545]

LOL !

[exitseven]

@msc545 its no joke/

[msc545]

How many illegal aliens in your state tried to vote? Exactly how many, and how many did you prove tried to vote?

[exitseven]

@msc545 it is impossible to find out. They devised the system that had no checks.

[msc545]

B ullshit

[msc545]

Biden stole nothing. That is a lie that Trump cooked up because he can't stand the fact that people didn't like him at that point. They still don't.

[msc545]

Now, that means probably no illegal aliens voted, and if they did, it wasn't enough to change the election. That has never happened in this country in almost 300 years. You'd think you'd learn something from history.

[goaded]

"any information came in that would mean [President Trump] could no longer be President he would reject it. And any theory, no matter how far-fetched, no matter how not based in law, that would indicate that he could, he latched on to that. And we had — we were confident that we had very strong proof of that pattern.” (Jack Smith sworn testimony to House, p. 28)

He knew he'd lost, he just lied about it.

Earlier on the same page: "one of the strengths of our case and why we felt we had such strong proof is all witnesses were not going to be political enemies of the President.

They were going to be political allies.

We had numerous witnesses who would say, "I voted for President Trump. I campaigned for Trump President Trump. I wanted him to win."
...
Our case was built on, frankly, Republicans who put their allegiance to the country before the party.

And so the President got information from people he trusted on other issues.

He rejected it whenever it didn't fit him staying in office."

[blackeagle007]

He can’t do that.

[msc545]

Sure he can do that. Who is going to stop him?

[blackeagle007]

How? He talks more shit than I did in a life time. But when reality hits, he’s TACO