hopefully, you are right. I do vote by mail, and I have concerns about my signature being objected to and my vote ruled invalid. I don't think this system fully addresses the issues, but it seems to be a good start. It still takes a lot of people looking at the ballots.
Election Fraud
- Thread starter babe
- Start date
hopefully, you are right. I do vote by mail, and I have concerns about my signature being objected to and my vote ruled invalid. I don't think this system fully addresses the issues, but it seems to be a good start. It still takes a lot of people looking at the ballots.
Here's official information on the 2010 cebsus and voter registration and lots of relevant trends.... I will try to get updated information....
https://www.lavote.net/Documents/2010-la-county-electoral-profile-.pdf
Here is their summary in concise form:
The vast size and diversity of the County make it the largest and most complex election jurisdiction in the country, with over 500 political districts, including the County’s five member, Board of Supervisors and municipal governments. Over 75%, 4,360,410 of the County of Los Angeles’ eligible population (5.8 million) are registered to vote. Of these registered voters, 654,620 (15%) are Permanent Vote By Mail Voters
and here is the official census presentation from the US gov, which is a source for the above County information:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/losangelescountycalifornia,CA/PST045218
https://www.lavote.net/Documents/2010-la-county-electoral-profile-.pdf
Here is their summary in concise form:
The vast size and diversity of the County make it the largest and most complex election jurisdiction in the country, with over 500 political districts, including the County’s five member, Board of Supervisors and municipal governments. Over 75%, 4,360,410 of the County of Los Angeles’ eligible population (5.8 million) are registered to vote. Of these registered voters, 654,620 (15%) are Permanent Vote By Mail Voters
and here is the official census presentation from the US gov, which is a source for the above County information:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/losangelescountycalifornia,CA/PST045218
Last edited:
We do not have official or documented records here of newcomers or other ineligibe voters, non-citizen or whatever. Let's see what we can find about that.....
The country represents re 2010 that the population is 9.8M, with 5.8M eligibe to vote (age 18 plus), and 75% of those on the registration rolls(4.6M). .64M perm mail voters, 15%..
The country represents re 2010 that the population is 9.8M, with 5.8M eligibe to vote (age 18 plus), and 75% of those on the registration rolls(4.6M). .64M perm mail voters, 15%..
Last edited:
Here's a good source for actual voting data in LA County:
https://lavote.net/election-results#year=2016&election=3496
In the 2016 general election, 1.2M vbm ballots of 3.6M total ballots were counted as valid....
Clinton got 72% of those votes vs. Trump 23%.
Schiff got 78% vs. 22%
https://lavote.net/election-results#year=2016&election=3496
In the 2016 general election, 1.2M vbm ballots of 3.6M total ballots were counted as valid....
Clinton got 72% of those votes vs. Trump 23%.
Schiff got 78% vs. 22%
Last edited:
Here's an estimate of non-citizen LA County residents....
http://www.laalmanac.com/population/po23a.php
It adds up to about 1.6M.
Need to get a same-year population estimate, which I think is now over 10.2M from some source I saw and linked above.... still same year date is desired. We do have age-breakout from the US census link.... over 20% too young to vote....
it sorta convergtes that there are about 6 M eligible voters in the county. With 4.5M registered ()round number. and 3.3 who voted.
So if Judicial Watch is getting court victory for checking on over 1.5 who haven't voted for years or who are thought to ineligible on the rolls, how many registrants are there in all that?
4.5 M registered, of about 6M actually eligible, would be a 75% voter registration rate.... So where do we get possibly 1.5 M ineligible registrants?
There are ways to get estimates of these things.....
do a poll (survey) to ask people to give up their facts.... Do 75% of respondents actually claim they registered? I mean people on the ground, in the county.. Or do we get just 50%......
pore over government data compilations...... welfare participants, birth stats, whatever.
How about IRS tax filers in the county.... how many are there??? And can we get the info off of the tax forms about citizenship?
Privacy laws.
But can government agencies release statistical compilations relevant to a case in the courts if ordered by a court to respond to a subpoena?
http://www.laalmanac.com/population/po23a.php
It adds up to about 1.6M.
Need to get a same-year population estimate, which I think is now over 10.2M from some source I saw and linked above.... still same year date is desired. We do have age-breakout from the US census link.... over 20% too young to vote....
it sorta convergtes that there are about 6 M eligible voters in the county. With 4.5M registered ()round number. and 3.3 who voted.
So if Judicial Watch is getting court victory for checking on over 1.5 who haven't voted for years or who are thought to ineligible on the rolls, how many registrants are there in all that?
4.5 M registered, of about 6M actually eligible, would be a 75% voter registration rate.... So where do we get possibly 1.5 M ineligible registrants?
There are ways to get estimates of these things.....
do a poll (survey) to ask people to give up their facts.... Do 75% of respondents actually claim they registered? I mean people on the ground, in the county.. Or do we get just 50%......
pore over government data compilations...... welfare participants, birth stats, whatever.
How about IRS tax filers in the county.... how many are there??? And can we get the info off of the tax forms about citizenship?
Privacy laws.
But can government agencies release statistical compilations relevant to a case in the courts if ordered by a court to respond to a subpoena?
Last edited:
Here is an article that seems to me to be informative on the subject....
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...ion_inactive_voters_on_its_rolls__140602.html
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...ion_inactive_voters_on_its_rolls__140602.html
This isn't the same at all.
Voter intimidation at the polls you're describing is a public safety issue, and there's already funds and programs allocated to that.
When your privately funded special interest groups can provide evidence that there IS statistically meaningful electoral fraud happening, let's talk about creating an expensive, bloated, multifactor authentication program that makes HG Wells look like snow white.
I'll be at the table that day.
I really do want to encourage you here. If you believe in something, keep at it. Just don't expect others to put on the effort you would without the evidence.
There's not really a way for me to not come across as horribly condescending, but something else I recommend would be instead of a lot of text opinion, you work on being more succinct with your messages? I know I get long winded sometimes, and it helps me to simplify my own thoughts.
There's not really a way for me to not come across as horribly condescending, but something else I recommend would be instead of a lot of text opinion, you work on being more succinct with your messages? I know I get long winded sometimes, and it helps me to simplify my own thoughts.
Erection Fraud is a crime against women. It should be prosecuted to the full extent. If it's 5" or less it should be a misdemeanor. If it is greater than 7" it should be a felt in me. If between those signifiers it should be up to prostitiunial discretion.
JazzyFresh
Banned
“This was a calibration error of the touch-screen on the machine,” Scalzitti said. “When Mr. Moynihan used the touch-screen, it improperly assigned his votes due to improper calibration.”
Lol sure
Lol sure
This is fun rhetoric.
I think voter intimidation doesn't require police lines with billy clubbed jackbooted fully geared fully computered thugs running a complete gov profile on every citizen before "clearing" them as OK to vote.
And it doesn't necessarily mean violence from concerned citizens intent up getting the right vote.
laws need legal definitions of the terms, the acts proscrbed, and laws need some patrol and observation effort that is resource-efficient. People need to know the law, and be willing to come to the police with concerns, and law enforcement needs to impartial.
If anyone is turned away from the polling site for any wrong reason, the people responsible need appropriate legal consequences.
And, I admit, that's still quite an undertaking. Affordability is an issue.
This is really a very decent post.
Before I took off for a couple of days, I thought the article from realclearpolitics was helpful, at least for me, in organizing the aspects of this issue.
Only about 1000 actual fraud votes found by the effort JD made, but an important restoration of the federal election law Clinton sorted declared wasn't going to be enforced.
I admit to being very obtuse, and I gather links or sources in my own effort to understand stuff. Your posts have been helpful.