This election has been thrown into chaos and delayed due to mass main-in ballots...
Is this a good idea going forward?
Probably. I've become more than half convinced it can be done safely and without massive fraud. The delay needs addressed; ballot counting should commence days before the election and accepting ballots long after election day should be ended. We'll also need some method better than what we have to speed up the counting of mail in ballots.
On the other hand, I don't mind requiring a little effort to cast a ballot. If you are too lazy to put out even that small effort we probably don't want your vote anyway.
It seems we are of the same mind. I don't have a problem with mail-in ballots—with appropriate safeguards of course, like postmarks, but, I think there is something intrinsic to the Right of voting in the effort to go to the polls.
If I had a choice, I would never choose mail-in over in-person voting, but, I can accept the validity of a properly structured mail-in choice. Meaning, I would demand an election day postmark. I don't have a problem with a 3 or 4 day extension for counting mail-in ballots as long as they are properly postmarked.
I think Pennsylvania really screwed-up with their prepaid ballots that may or may not receive a postmark. This is the one knock where I can agree with the Trump campaign's legal battles.
The thing about mail-in voting is that makes it easier to vote. Seems like a good thing to me. Just need standards, but states are allowed to set their own rules.
Seems to me that if ballots need to be accepted 4 days (or 2 or 10) after election day they can be sent out 4 days (or 2 or 10) earlier and then not accepted after that day.
Hadn't heard of the Pa. thing - that is unacceptable.
Florida had a simple process, if you wanted to mail in your ballot, you had to do it by a certain date. If you didn't get it done by the alloted date, tough.
Florida is one of the most populated and diverse states, and it got the job done as was required by our Nation's electoral process.
The States that did not get it done, like PA, decided to ignore both the Constitution and precedence to do their own thing...and I believe it was done so that if Trump had a several hundred thousand vote lead, they could create enough ballots post election to change the outcome.
Why else do something so obviously questionable?
If you choose to keep blinders on to this corruption so be it. But there is no accountability in PA, there is no way to prove the validity of those late ballots in PA, and the very acceptance of ballots after the set date of the election is un-constitutional.
PA is obviously acting negligently and that puts all others that are dragging their feet and making Trump's lead disappear be put into question as well (IE - Georgia).
This is becoming more akin to those Eastern European elections by the day.
But the American people were told this was what was going to happen, repeatedly by the media, that this would drag on, and what appeared a Trump victory would become a Biden win.
The script was written well in advance.
Well stated overall, except that the media did not tell us what was going to happen.... with the exception of Newsmax and a handful of conservative publications. American conservatives (overall) are exceptionally naïve. Many here have even become apologists for Democrats. It is no wonder that voter fraud is being committed so easily this election year.
If voters in GA, PA, NV and AZ would call their state representatives and insist upon a proper count, it could make a difference. Why? Because those representatives recoil in terror if they get about 30 calls (usually much less). But instead, Republicans remain polite in the hope that everything will "work out" and that the election process "will be fair."
You are correct in saying, "The script was written well in advance."
Thank you for pointing that out.
There's no fraud. Both Arizona and Georgia are run by Republicans and their rules were made by Republicans and Trump's lawsuits were dismissed by Republicans.
However, if they know there's fraud, then by all means, bring the evidence to court and make your case.
Yes, they were told this, because in many states they count the mail-in ballots after the in-person ballots. The in-person ballots favored Trump in many places while the mail-in ballots favor Biden. It's actually pretty simple.
As I understand it, we should stop counting in all the places where Biden is gaining and keep counting in Arizona where Trump is gaining.
Once again, the popular vote favors the Democratic candidate, so perhaps we can take solace in the fact that, if Biden wins, the will of the people is being carried out. Four million more people voted for Biden.
It's funny we don't hear about the massive fraud that obviously took place this year in Florida that allowed Trump to win as well as the massive fraud that took place in 2016 that allowed Trump to win. My understanding is that Democrats were distracted by huge child sex trafficking set up by Republicans and forgot to vote.
You may be correct, but before I would make such a claim I would have to have proof of it.
I have absolutely no problem with establishing a national mail-in, bipartisan, commission to create standards so that everyone can have confidence in the process.
My only problem with that is that the federal government would once more be usurping what was the states control. Of course, the idea of congress doing anything that could negatively affect a political party's power and still have confidence in it is rather comical.
The proof is that they collected and tallied mail-in ballots after the election, days after, knowing that, I don't need to know anything else.
The fate of the Nation is in the hands of GA.
Should the Dems secure the majority in the Senate, we will see sweeping changes to our country. Changes that make what the Obama Admin pushed through (IE ACA) seem moderate in comparison.
The economy is set to struggle, at best, so those who didn't or weren't able to prepare for difficult times in the coming years I feel for them
Trump could survive losing GA...if he took Pa, NC, Az and Nv. So no, Pa is holding the reins, and Trump has lost.
But I highly disagree with states legally accepting ballots after Nov. 3 as proof of fraud; it is up to states to set the rules for voting. Even though having 4 of 5 states tailing the rest in counting being states that went R last time and now switches to D leaves a real stink it is not "proof" of anything.
The economy: I predict a rise to what it was with the advent of a vaccine. Then a slowing or decline for the next 2-3 years as the Democrat agenda of slapping business and forcing it to move offshore reinstates itself, of ever higher taxation to fund their give-away programs (now to include 20+ illegal aliens). On the plus side we will save money by firing ICE and the border patrol but it won't come close to cancelling out the negatives.
And if THAT happens we will surely see a Republican back in office in 4 years, not 8. Even if Biden is physically/mentally able to run again (doubtful) he will lose as the economy tanks.
You are missing much of the larger picture, the Global Compact for Migration, Agenda 2030, etc. very real policies of the UN and International Agencies that were put on pause while Trump held office because he did not support them.
As for GA, when I said the fate of the Nation was in its hands... it is... because I was talking about the two Senate seats that are going to runoff elections. If they go to the Democrats then the Democrats will have total control of Congress and the Executive Office and will be able to do whatever they want, change the amount of Justices on the Supreme Court, Raise Taxes, reinstall the Penalties for not having Insurance, institute a Social Credit system, etc.
Trade will quickly revert to favoring China and giving tax breaks to corporations that move their HQs overseas... essentially everything good that did come out of Trump's Administration will be undone, and the siphoning of wealth and jobs from Americans will be back on track as it had been the 25 years prior to Trump.
Trump's four years was just a pause, he would have needed another four years to truly reverse some of these trends and strengthen the American position against China's growing global dominance and the efforts of International Corporatism.
Now we get back to America's economic decline and the disaffection with National Sovereignty and adherence to the Constitution above all.
Ah! The Senate. Yes, that makes sense in that context.
You've said the same thing about the economy I did; I just see an improvement until Biden and the D's get their fingers into the pot again, whereupon it will tank.
Where in history has that happened? Democrats tanking the economy? I can show you a few Republican examples - too little regulation causing massive problems.
Did you not follow the train of thought?
D1 creates massive taxes and regulations. 4 years the economy begins to respond as businesses leave or downsize, and R1 is said to be the cause as he governs over a bad economy. But R1 reduces taxes and regulations...and the economy responds as business slowly grows over the next 5 or 6 years. By this time D2 has come into the WH and gets credit for a now booming economy: he responds by with crippling new regulations and higher taxes...which, after several years has severely affected the economy shortly after R2 has taken the reins.
Perhaps the best possible illustration of the concept was the Great Recession. Congress created regulations demanding that mortgage companies make sub par mortgages under the misbegotten notion that everyone deserves a house. Give it a few years (and many warnings from the banking industry) and low and behold the economy crashes in the worst recession since the 20's. I don't recall (or care) which party was in power then or after; the point is that it takes years for poor policies to have an effect and more years to correct.
IMO, the Trump phenomenon (economic growth far beyond what was supposed to ever be possible) was so quick because he did so much and publicized it so much...coupled with an equally vocal demonization of Democrats. Democrats that are the primary enemy of effective, prosperous business; if they don't like what is happening then it must be good for business: I will expand in the US this time rather than China (or Mexico or Europe or wherever else). I will hire more people, I will raise wages. And just that quick the economy absolutely boomed, but seldom if ever have so many changes so beneficial to business been made.
A completely follow the train of thought. I just don't see how you're drawing that conclusion.
The economy was robust under Clinton. After 8 years of Bush, it crashed. Then Obama built it back up and Trump benefitted from Obama's growing economy.
If policies take time to work, then shouldn't Obama get credit for Trump's success?
Obama spent his way out of the recession by injecting vast amounts of money into the economy. Of course it grew...it grew even as he took steps to bog down business and in spite of those efforts. Money inserted into an economy has a way of doing that.
It was telling that in spite of those huge amount of unearned dollars the economy grew at a very anemic rate...until Trump came onto the scene and began working for business rather than against it. Whereupon it hit levels that the experts had said we would never see again because it was not possible with an economy as large as that of the US.
Unfortunately, you're regurgitating one of Trump's many false talking points - that the economy hit "levels never before seen".
And if Obama spends his way into a good economy, Trump must have too, since the deficit ballooned under his leadership. Funny how that deficit thing no longer seems to matter.
And the current economic boom, which you have personally lauded, came from the stimulus, did it not? You can't have it both ways.
Employment figures (or unemployment figures) are one measure of an economy. How long since we saw general unemployment as what we had under Trump? How long since we saw black unemployment figures lower than we saw under Trump?
Yes, it sounds like we both agree that simply throwing money into the economy is unwise...except that it is the only way we know to come out of a recession. But cutting taxes is not "throwing money", for the obvious answer is to reduce spending along with it. Something our government, in it's magnificent understanding of how debt works, does not comprehend. (If cutting taxes means "throwing money", then then inescapable corollary is that the government actually owns what I have earned and I am only given ownership of what the government allows me to have; something I most heartily disagree with.)
Trump's "stimulus"; I actually doubt it did much. Most people simply saved it for when they lost their job and what WAS spent mostly came out of already available stocks of items and then it was over. It provided no new jobs at all.
Unfortunately, cutting taxes and NOT cutting spending is something Republicans usually oppose. If you cut taxes while maintaining and/or increasing spending, that tax cut will stimulate the economy and, as they say, "kick the can" down the road for somebody else to deal with the consequences.
That said, I find it very interesting that Trump, for all intents and purposes, turns out to be a Keynesian. In other words, deficits don't matter that much.
So effectively, Trump spent his way into his Trump economy. Had he cut spending, it would be a different story. And also, he's done this his whole life, and gone bankrupt many different times.
You're blaming Trump (again) for what he does not control, this time the purse strings that only Congress has hold of.
But it doesn't matter; I agree whole heartedly in my disappointment in intentional deficit spending. The best I can say is that Trump got something for his "spending", while the tremendous amounts Obama threw away were just that; throw away with nothing but a return to what we already had. No new roads, no new dams, no new anything.
I think Obama had a much bigger hill to climb than Trump. Obama got a trashed economy. Trump got a healthy economy.
I doubt very much we got nothing for what Obama spent. Ironically, he used a lot of that money to help private industry, like the auto industry. I'm not sure what public projects he completed, but I guess I could research it. I didn't hear what public projects Trump completed. What new roads, bridges, and dams did we get under Trump? I know he built part of a wall.
You and I agree that in order for the deficit and government spending to be reduced, there's going to have to be a lot less pork in the federal budget. I'm not sure our system of government supports that. Each member of Congress and each Senator is looking to direct tax dollars into his or her district or state. They all just want the other person to cut spending without doing much themselves.
Yeah, Trump got a start on a much needed physical barrier to protect our border. But that wasn't the point and I hadn't even though of it.
Trump's tax cuts were not intended to build a dam or a wall. They were intended as just one part of a multi faceted plan to promote business - and jobs and the economy and even national security (you aren't very secure if you can't build a tank or a plane). And he was successful beyond any projections.
Obama, on the other hand, spent his money restoring what had been lost. He could have put people to work with public projects, but he didn't. Understandable as it takes years of studies to even erect a statue any more. Studies to check out that anthill where it will be built, to check the status of the birds that will fly over it and the dogs that will pee on it.
So there were reasons, maybe even valid ones, for not having anything to show, now, for the expenditures. But the fact still remains that there is nothing, now, that we can point to and say "See? The Obama stimulus not only gave us the jobs to build a monument (or dam or road or museum) and help end the recession but we now have a beautiful museum we can visit!" Trump's stimulus, either tax cut or the checks he sent out, were not intended for that purpose.
No, our government is not being used to slow spending; it is being used to increase spending in order to buy votes. And that's a huge problem, one we may not be able to solve and that could end up destroying the country.
If it does, it won't the first to succumb to that disease. Egypt did it with the pyramids, Rome did it with the coliseum and related projects. When government spends, on frivolous things it wants but cannot afford, the end is in sight for that country. Nor does it have to be giant physical projects; it might be welfare for able bodied people, medical care for those that don't buy insurance, beautiful homes for those that don't put out the effort to buy/build themselves, military more than is needed, gifts to the rest of the world or a hundred other things.
On black unemployment:
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/ar … omic-gains
Most of those gains made under Obama.
From your link: "Black unemployment did reach a low last year" so far so good, but then it continues: but much of the progress came during the Obama administration.
Put more simply, "Obama did the hard work, while Trump claimed the credit". This is indeed the mantra from the left, but it is not one I subscribe to. What made the difference was not the return to a reasonable economy, it was the new trade agreements. It was a lower tax rate for business, encouraging growth and return to the US. It was a lower tax rate for the wealth that supply the money for business growth...if the profit isn't denied in excessive taxation. It was even the trade war with China, convincing business that they had a government on their side rather than China's. It was reducing onerous business regulations, again producing a reason to expand and return.
Obama, on the other hand, did the exact opposite of all of those. You will have a real hard time convincing me that the policies, philosophy and actions under Obama convinced business that the US is a good place to operate - that it was Obama that convinced business to expand or return. It is one thing to reopen a factory shuttered (or slowed) by recession and stop the hemorrhage of money; it is quite another to voluntarily build another one, risking another hemorrhage in the hopes of a nice profit...that will then be taken in taxes.
Put very simply, the left does not like business, would do away with business if it could, and will hamstring business every time it can concoct any made up reason to do so. This does not produce a strong business climate and was not responsible for the kind of figures we saw under Trump.
No matter how you cut it, no matter how it is spun, the fact remains that Trump was spied on while "on the stump". Trump himself said that the "wiretapping" might not be literal, but that he was spied on via some method (again, from your link).
Getting hard to follow the links.
What I'm saying is simple. Under Obama, black unemployment went from 16.7% to 6% (or something close to that). So the movement was already toward low black unemployment. To say Trump did something so amazing as to continue that trend I think is disingenuous.
Much like the stock market. Obama gets no credit from Republicans for the stock market moving from 7800 to 20000, but Trump is a genius for moving it from 20000 to 26000. Do the math. Objectively, one is better than the other.
This seems to be the state of things these days - so many people accepting the truth of something with no proof.
Ballots submitted prior to and on Election Day should be counted. If there is evidence of fraud, then that is for the courts. So far, every Trump accusation has been tossed out as frivolous because they haven't presented any evidence. If they have evidence, then present it in the courts.
Given the last 30 or so years, this seems like more denial of reality and facts.
Also, I'm sure Trump, if he loses, will run again in 2024.
Don't know why you would assume the economy would tank. It did just fine under Obama. It tanked under Bush. And it wasn't regulation, but deregulation that did that. And it did fine under Clinton. In fact, if you look at history, the stock market and economy does better under Democrats.
This seems like more denial of reality and facts. It's not factual that there's voting fraud. It's not factual that, in the last thirty years, the economy has done better under Republicans than Democrats.
I will say this though, I just saw Nancy Pelosi say that Biden has a "tremendous mandate". I don't know what fantasy world she's living in, but that's the exact opposite of what I want to hear Democrats say. I want to hear about a country divided and about working together and about focusing on what the Republicans and Democrats have in common and focusing on those things in a bi-partisan way. I do agree that if Democrats think they have a mandate, they'll be out of office in 4 years. The Democrats can secure power if they focus on all the things we agree on and work to diminish the chaos.
The proof rests on verifying all the ballots mailed in are valid. This will take time to determine and if Biden wins fair and square, I am fine with the results. We get the government we deserve, another four years we will get a new chance to choose.
What is not clear at this point is - are all the mail in ballot valid?
"In fact, if you look at history, the stock market and economy does better under Democrats."
Is that because it takes several years for either excessive taxation OR excessive regulation to be reflected in the economy? And vice versa, of course - it takes time for poor policies to show up in the economy?
That would explain why it seems that overtaxing and over regulating business seems to work under D's, and the opposite under R's. Makes sense to me, at least.
Sounds like common sense stuff, Wilderness. We should just have a national standard for mail-in voting. However, our system is set up to allow each state to set up its own rules. Funny how states rights don't seem so important suddenly.
Having said that, there should be a set of standards so we can all have confidence in the process.
Yeah, how can you create confidence in this? How can you create confidence in a system that, as you will see, can easily be corrupted - nefarious people do not abide by the rules.
Which is why there are monitors from both parties watching the count.
I did not watch the hour and a half of your cell phone video of another cell phone video with people saying they don't know what is happening; it may be fraud.
But what I did see did not show fraud. It reminded me of the video I watched of someone pulling a red wagon into a polling station late at night, with a black box that "looked like boxes used for ballots" and indicated fraud. It was a cameraman setting up for the next day taking a common electronics carrier with his camera gear in.
It also reminds me of the poor poll worker in Georgia being terrorized because somebody posted a similar video of them ripping up a piece of paper and the videographer suggested it was a ballot. Except it turned out it wasn't a ballot. (we don't know the poll worker's political affiliation, but he, along with other people on both sides, are victims of this kind of conspiratorial vigilantism)
And now the poll worker, a volunteer, is in hiding and fearing for his life.
What's sad is that Trump is riling up his supporters, asking them to go find things while saying there's fraud but not having any evidence himself. Meanwhile, his own advisers are telling him he really has few legal avenues because they don't have any proof of any fraud. His original charges were systemic - STOP COUNTING.
Except at the point he said that, he would have lost.
None of it really makes much sense. He obviously wants it to be true and hopes to force it into existence. It's very cult-like. His followers just believe whatever he says whether he provides proof or not.
I dunno, Crank. While I certainly sympathize with your example poll worker, I'm not surprised that the rabid right is behaving badly. Not after what has been done the past 4 years to their god/king and now they (that unspecified "they" that always seems present everywhere) have fraudulently stolen the election. Nor is it taking Trump to "rile them up"; they are quite capable of doing it themselves. Blame that part of the problem on the increasing violence and increasing acceptance of violence for the past year. It has become the norm to step outside of ethical/moral behavior to get what you want, and Trump did not start that. Not this time around.
Let me quote you:
"It has become the norm to step outside of ethical/moral behavior to get what you want."
I agree, Trump did not start it. However, that sentence describes him well.
Violence has been a tool for many years of those who believe their rights are being violated and of those who do the violating. It's not new.
I acknowledge and understand the point you are trying to make and don't necessarily disagree with the sentiment. It's just not even remotely new during times of turmoil.
I haven't read through all of the answers here. At this juncture, because so many have so many reservations, because this entire process has been so novel across so many states, because the process has been so undermined....I wish one state would step up to the plate and agree to have all ballots reviewed to prove validity.
If there is no evidence of fraud, of votes from outside of state, of votes by dead people, and if there are no votes by non citizens we can all sigh a breath of relief and have our faith restored.
If not, then all states should insist on following suit. I don't care who wins,as long as it is fair and legal.
The media, what am I saying? I mean the Democratic Party state propaganda media (including Fox and the others like the Wall Street journal) are “inaugurating” a president whose election results have not been certified by any state, totally ignoring reporting on all the stories of fraud and implausible results like these.
This is the behavior of a tyrannical banana republic’s media.
Have you even seen this reported on anywhere in the media?
Which is why we need faith restored. We don't need another 4 years with a candidate whining like Hillary did.
Hillary whined for four years? I must have missed that. She hasn't been in the news for three years and eleven months. Is she in jail yet?
What I did hear was Trump whining about his crowd sizes and a fraudulent vote from 2016 that meant he really won the popular vote. He whined even though he won. Anytime things don't go his way, he whines and blames somebody else. Whiniest President ever.
The perfect metaphor for Trump's presidency was the moment Biden was declared the winner: Trump was golfing and COVID was spreading through the White House unchecked. Apropos, no?
Hillary conceded. Obama invited Trump to the White House.
We'll see if either of those things happen, I guess.
What we need is for all these conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists to go away.
I'm always comparing the left to fringe religious groups. Your post compliments my sentiments. You guys talk about covid like it's a sin. Someone did something wrong to get it.
Sheesh. I can't even respond to what I see as fanaticism.
Getting COVID is bad when you openly mock the very things that will help prevent you from getting it. It's also idiocy. Further, Mark Meadows didn't bother to tell anyone he had it for some time, thereby exposing others to the virus. So yes, he did something wrong. He didn't care enough to take standard safety measures and he didn't care enough to at least warn other people he had it. Thus, it spreads more.
Actively putting others in danger, not caring, golfing, ignoring facts. Kind of says it all.
Hillary is what Trumpers revert to when they got nothiin'.
I'm perplexed by the American voting system. We are a federation in Australia, too. The states are not allowed to get their fingers on anything to do with the federal elections. State elections are run by states. But the federal elections are run by an independent Electoral Commission. There is one set of rules for the Federal election and they apply equally across the whole country. It's an obvious step to make sure states can't get up to any shenanigans.
Sounds like a plan but we have a historic distrust in government. For all the arguing and distrust we have it would be ten times worse if the federal government had run this election.
All the more reason to have an independent body that isn't run by any government, then?
Who gets to be on this independent body, and how do they get there? Is it composed of the man-in-the-street, or of politicians voted onto the body? How are the people represented - one per district or one per million people (obviously just numbers, but hopefully you will pick up the meaning)? How is it funded - by government, by deep pockets of a few or by donations from the masses? What are the avenues to disagree with decisions by that body? Are the laws it creates binding (without recourse to an elected legislature) or is there recourse if the people don't like them?
Lots of questions, and potential problems, with another body independent of the law makers that are nevertheless making laws. If that makes sense.
by Readmikenow 3 weeks ago
As I said before, this isn't going away. "Exclusive: Report confirms 2020 abuses and RNC deploys 'year-round' election integrity unit“However, Democrats, including some public officials, used the pandemic as a pretense toachieve long-sought policy goals such as expanded mail voting and...
by Credence2 14 months ago
It is just dumb, why would the President even open this can of worms? It if were me, I would have asked privately about the possibility of postponing elections, before revealing to the entire world how ignorant I was about the nature and content of this nation's guiding document. Stupid stuff,...
by Readmikenow 13 months ago
If you want to know what Democrats are guilty of...simply see what they are accusing others of doing. THAT is what they're guilty of doing."Will Democrats accept election loss? New report says no.But there is another, equally pressing question: Will Democrats accept the results of the...
by Jack Lee 11 months ago
This election has been thrown into chaos and delayed due to mass main-in ballots...Is this a good idea going forward?
by JOC 16 months ago
Could it be that Trump is upset about Michigan and Nevada promoting mail-in ballots because that will make it harder for his Russia allies to hack the technology associated with the voting?
by Kenna McHugh 9 months ago
Have you noticed that Trump supporters are not rioting? Why is that? From a friend: Copied and pasted - info from some of the lawyers from my group: Ok in a nutshell. This is going to the Supreme Court. Where they will rule that the election is invalid due to fraud or mistakes on a country...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|