2018 Midterm Results

[sharkey]

What is the brand name of the machines you are using???

Votech 2.0. Made in China?

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[satx78247]

The current Bexar County voting machines were OLD-school 18 years ago when they were purchased.
In 2018, parts are hard to find, so the county is trying to figure out what to buy to replace the relics.

yours, satx

 

[cherok2e]

I figure it's time to start the thread. I don't have cable or satellite. What are the early east coast results?

The Republicans are handicapped, like for the last36 years.

Did you know that since 1982, the Republican Party had been legally prohibited from contesting elections due to suspected vote fraud, because of a legal agreement called the Consent Decree the GOP made with the Democrat Party?

Finally, 36 years later, a judge has ended the agreement, freeing the Republican Party to ensure electoral integrity by investigating and pursuing suspected vote fraud.

THE 1982 CONSENT DECREE

As I explained in my post of November 15, 2012, “Why the GOP won’t challenge vote fraud,” in 1981, during the gubernatorial election in New Jersey (NJ), a lawsuit was brought against the Republican National Committee (RNC), the NJ Republican State Committee (RSC), and three individuals (John A. Kelly, Ronald Kaufman, and Alex Hurtado), accusing them of violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971, 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.


The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).

The lawsuit alleged that:

· The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.

· The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.


The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).

The lawsuit alleged that:

· The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.

· The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.

• The RNC enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers with “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands, to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting. Some of the officers allegedly wore firearms in a visible manner.

To settle the lawsuit, in 1982 — while Ronald Reagan was President (1981-1989) — the RNC and RSC entered into an agreement or Consent Decree, which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance.


The two parties agreed that “in the future, in all states and territories of the United States,” they would:

(d) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their employees to campaign within restricted polling areas or to interrogate prospective voters as to their qualifications to vote prior to their entry to a polling place;

(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;

(f) refrain from having private personnel deputized as law enforcement personnel in connection with ballot security activities.



The RNC also agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, “whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.”

To put it bluntly, the Consent Decree in effect gave a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America that has, in the language of the Consent Decree, “a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.” The term “substantial proportion” is not defined.

In 1987, the Consent Decree was modified to define “ballot security activities” as “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.”

 

[cherok2e]

The current Bexar County voting machines were OLD-school 18 years ago when they were purchased.
In 2018, parts are hard to find, so the county is trying to figure out what to buy to replace the relics.

yours, satx

It's time for paper ballots.
You go to the poll, show your picture ID (which has been issued only to legal citizens), show your registration card, pickup your ballot, fill it out, take it to the lock box area, stick your thumb in the ink, press it on the ballot, drop it in the box.
The polling officials count the number of ballots and submit the total to a representative of every party and call the number into the Secretary of State. They then count the votes and tabulate t...hem, give the totals to the Secretary of State over the phone, to the party representatives and the hard copy totals to a courier.
The Secretary of State has the total ballots cast and the vote totals over the phone and will soon have the hardcopy of the ballot and vote totals for reconciliation. After reconciling all the vote totals for the polling sites in the state they will announce the winners.
There is no need for armor car couriers as the totals at the polling site and Secretary of State must reconcile. If there are multiple voting sites the time lag for completion of counting and reconciling will be at a minimum because each place will have less to count. The polling sites can be in churches or community buildings and all procedures are done in the largest room. This allows anyone wanting to observe to see and there are no backrooms.
This also prevents the electronic voting tallies from being transferred to foreign entities, out of the United States, for reconciliation and transfer to the Secretary of State. This process allows foreign entities a chance to interfere in our elections.
The winners will be announced and you can count on accuracy because you have three different confirmations of every vote. It would seem that this process would take a little longer, but maybe not if this election is an example, and should be cheaper with minimal startup costs.

 

[satx78247]

cherok2e,

Well for starters, your proposal violates EVERY voter's RIGHT to a secret ballot.
I suggest that you take your (SILLY, imVho) notion to some State that actually HAS a severe voter fraud problem. - That place is NOT Bexar County, TX or any other place where I've been an Election Officer/Judge for 4 decades.
(Do NOT believe the conspiracy purveyors & lunatics of either political extreme, is my opinion.)

yours, satx

 

[cherok2e]

cherok2e,

Well for starters, your proposal violates EVERY voter's RIGHT to a secret ballot.
I suggest that you take your (SILLY, imVho) notion to some State that actually HAS a severe voter fraud problem. - That place is NOT Bexar County, TX or any other place where I've been an Election Officer/Judge for 4 decades.
(Do NOT believe the conspiracy purveyors & lunatics of either political extreme, is my opinion.)

yours, satx

Oh, my touchy aren't we. This was not a particular analysis of Bexar County but elections in general. And as or silly old me I'm not to fond of the vote results being put on the internet where there are third parties who have access to the totals. In some states these third parties and totals are reconciled in foreign countries before they reach the Secretary of State. Therefore, the vote total manipulation could occur in a foreign country, how's that for foreign country interference.

Did any ballot get signed and counted in a way as to identify the voter? The only thing you could be the least bit concerned with would be the thumb print. But if I really wanted to know who voted and how there's DNA and finger prints on evert ballot now. The votes are counted in smaller batches but done without machines so errors, short votes and long votes are caught for scrutiny by officials of both parties early on.

As for conspiracy theories I would say fraud is more common than you suspect, unless your a Democrat they had free access to ballots for 36 years. Since you say you have been involved for four decades you must be familiar with the 1982 Consent Decree. This case pretty much gave Democrats the free reign of voter recruitment, voting sites and counting duties and observations for 36 years. They should have got good at it in that amount of time. Well that order expired on December 1 2017 and they have someone watching now.

You've got to admit there are some pretty unbelievable results showing up. A Governor of one party wins by 300,000 and the Senator for the other party wins by 32,000. Or the Agriculture Secretary winning by 60.000 with most of the vote in and goes to bed and wakes up and lost by 32,000 votes. Reconciling those kind of numbers don't require conspiracy.

 

[satx78247]

Cherok2e,

And any of those cases of massive FRAUD happened in TEXAS??
May I also point out that FLORIDA & GEORGIA use paper ballots?? = DISHONESTY in elections has ZILCH to do with what sort of ballot is used..

yours, satx

 

[cherok2e]

Cherok2e,

And any of those cases of massive FRAUD happened in TEXAS??
May I also point out that FLORIDA & GEORGIA use paper ballots?? = DISHONESTY in elections has ZILCH to do with what sort of ballot is used..

yours, satx

Since you ask, I do believe I heard the audio on a video. which was taken in 'Texas' at a polling site where the question was asked of the election official. "My boy friend is out in the car and he has his ID but he heard he can't vote because he is a DACA. Can he vote?" 'Does he have his ID'? "Yes he has an ID but he is DACA". 'OH that's OK as long as he has an ID he can use a provision ballot, we've had a lot of them here today and they just use a provisional ballot'.
Can an illegal vote on a provisional ballot?
Now I don't know what you consider massive fraud but anything that cancels my vote is fraud and this was in Texas.
By the way are you a Democrat?

 

[sharkey]

Yeah there has been voter fraud in TX. The AG just prosecuted a case from 2016. They prosecute one and the other 99 get a pass. TX is not immune. The provisional ballots are a problem. Rather than say no, you can't vote. They vote on a provisional ballot. That is BS.
If the GOP doesn't want to continue dealing with this criminal fraud, they need to get on top of this. We have Democrat leaders saying illegals should vote for Pete's sake. What has happened in FL, GA, and AZ is reprehensible in a Republic. If we were in Venezuela, it would be fine.

Sent from my SM-T380 using Tapatalk

 

[seeker_two]

She broke some ribs. Close but no cigar.

....only because there wasn't a Clinton in the room.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[satx78247]

sharkey,

Since you ask, I do believe I heard
are you a Democrat?

"cherok2e" comment is TYPICAL of the common gossip passed about by morons to FOOL the nitwits of society.. - Personally, UNLESS & UNTIL there is PROOF that anyone actually voted a provisional ballot & had that provisional ballot counted in TX, it remains gossip & foolishness.


As for me, I'm a life-long GOP member.

yours, satx

 

[sharkey]

Well there is other fraud besides using a provisional ballot and that is what I was referring to. Happened in Tarrant County. In fact.
The bottom line is that of we don't shore up our voting process like our border, we will be over run.
Those in the GOP and the never Trumpers don't see a problem. The left will do whatever to win elections in FL, TX, and OH.

Btw, Beto is #3 on a recent poll for DNC candidates for the primary and guess what, he has a wall around his home in El Paso, like a rich white guy would.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[cherok2e]

sharkey,



"cherok2e" comment is TYPICAL of the common gossip passed about by morons to FOOL the nitwits of society.. - Personally, UNLESS & UNTIL there is PROOF that anyone actually voted a provisional ballot & had that provisional ballot counted in TX, it remains gossip & foolishness.


As for me, I'm a life-long GOP member.

yours, satx

Good for you but you should be more careful with your derogatory and snide remarks. It doesn't bode well for your argument and debate does not advance when it is part of the narrative. The use of the term 'moron' shows a lack of true debate protocol.
I only gave you what I observed in video collected at a polling station in Texas. By the way if you look I'm from Texas.
I would say that the convictions that have occurred here shows that it does happen.

 

[cherok2e]

Well there is other fraud besides using a provisional ballot and that is what I was referring to. Happened in Tarrant County. In fact.
The bottom line is that of we don't shore up our voting process like our border, we will be over run.
Those in the GOP and the never Trumpers don't see a problem. The left will do whatever to win elections in FL, TX, and OH.

Btw, Beto is #3 on a recent poll for DNC candidates for the primary and guess what, he has a wall around his home in El Paso, like a rich white guy would.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

I believe that this case in New Jersey in 1982 caused the GOP to stop most political activity concerning elections. However this Decree expired on December 1, 2017. I think the GOP activities will change.

THE 1982 CONSENT DECREE

As I explained in my post of November 15, 2012, “Why the GOP won’t challenge vote fraud,” in 1981, during the gubernatorial election in New Jersey (NJ), a lawsuit was brought against the Republican National Committee (RNC), the NJ Republican State Committee (RSC), and three individuals (John A. Kelly, Ronald Kaufman, and Alex Hurtado), accusing them of violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971, 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.


The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).

The lawsuit alleged that:

· The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.

· The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.


The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).

The lawsuit alleged that:

· The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.

· The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.

• The RNC enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers with “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands, to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting. Some of the officers allegedly wore firearms in a visible manner.

To settle the lawsuit, in 1982 — while Ronald Reagan was President (1981-1989) — the RNC and RSC entered into an agreement or Consent Decree, which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance.


The two parties agreed that “in the future, in all states and territories of the United States,” they would:

(d) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their employees to campaign within restricted polling areas or to interrogate prospective voters as to their qualifications to vote prior to their entry to a polling place;

(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;

(f) refrain from having private personnel deputized as law enforcement personnel in connection with ballot security activities.



The RNC also agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, “whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.”

To put it bluntly, the Consent Decree in effect gave a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America that has, in the language of the Consent Decree, “a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.” The term “substantial proportion” is not defined.

In 1987, the Consent Decree was modified to define “ballot security activities” as “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.”

 

[avvidclif]

Looks like Bexar County is finally going to replace the EASILY manipulated machines.

For satx read the posts where it shows how easy it is to change them.

 

[satx78247]

Good for you but you should be more careful with your derogatory and snide remarks. It doesn't bode well for your argument and debate does not advance when it is part of the narrative. The use of the term 'moron' shows a lack of true debate protocol.
I only gave you what I observed in video collected at a polling station in Texas. By the way if you look I'm from Texas.
I would say that the convictions that have occurred here shows that it does happen.

cherok2e.,

And you have PROOF that everything that you've posted is 100% CORRECT??
OR
Did you just uncritically believe & thereafter post FOOLISHNESS & LIES from the Worldwideweird??
(In case you don't know making videos during a TX election inside any polling place is UNLAWFUL, thus I doubt that what you posted is anything but NONSENSE.)

yours, satx

 

[avvidclif]

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. Sigh.

 

[satx78247]

avidcliff,

The major difference in your comment & the FACTS is that the people who comment without EVIDENCE of FRAUD are generally NAIVE & CLUELESS.
(IF you can get judges/clerks of the DP & the GOP to conspire to CHEAT, you can do what you suggest BUT getting over 6 people to CHEAT on each of HUNDREDS of machines is NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE.)

Do you have any PROOF whatever for what you've posted to this thread??

yours, satx

 

[Brains]

What have we learned, class?

If you can get an election official who is so indignantly confident that his position is correct, not only will he completely ignore the truth, he'll get on the internet and outright deny it! Oh, and he'll call you a moron too.

Carry on then.

 

[satx78247]

Brains,

In order to CHEAT with our old-school machines is NO different than you can defraud a bank. = YES bank fraud occasionally happens IF a whole crowd of people CONSPIRE to do the fraud. = SAME THING here.

yours, satx