Voter Suppression

[St1ck]

4 minutes ago, angelinkc said:

I thought they changed the law in 2916 or 18 and clearly allow mass harvesting. 

What?

[Lhalo]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

And hypocritical 

Drunk posting FTMFW!!!!

[angelinkc]

Just now, st1ckboy said:

What?

I am saying California allows groups to collect votes and turn them in in bulk. 

[Tank]

8 minutes ago, angelinkc said:

I am saying California allows groups to collect votes and turn them in in bulk. 

you posted the year as 2916, not 2016, future boy.

[Tank]

9 minutes ago, angelinkc said:

I am saying California allows groups to collect votes and turn them in in bulk. 

the only people who should be collecting ballots are poll workers and postal carriers. anything other than this shouldn't be allowed.

[Spirit]

Voting by mail is the shiz!  I don't know why states like CA don't have it as their standard.  Guess they want to suppress the vote.

 

 

[St1ck]

5 minutes ago, Spirit said:

Voting by mail is the shiz!  I don't know why states like CA don't have it as their standard.  Guess they want to suppress the vote.

 

 

In the 2018 Primary 65% of the state voted by mail. So it's getting closer. 

[Lou]

On May 26, 2020 at 2:31 PM, Tank said:

you posted the year as 2916, not 2016, future boy.

He also said 18, so he's past boy, too

[Rico]

On 5/26/2020 at 2:22 PM, angelinkc said:

I am saying California allows groups to collect votes and turn them in in bulk. 

I've never seen this.  Why would anyone give their ballot to a stranger?

[Lou]

7 minutes ago, Rico said:

I've never seen this.  Why would anyone give their ballot to a stranger?

Like the postman?

[St1ck]

Just now, Lou said:

Like the postman?

[angelinkc]

6 minutes ago, Rico said:

I've never seen this.  Why would anyone give their ballot to a stranger?

Generally in the ghetto. Exchange your vote for a few dollars or malt liquor of your  choice

[angelinkc]

1 hour ago, st1ckboy said:

In the 2018 Primary 65% of the state voted by mail. So it's getting closer. 

Cali does have one of the better systems in place. Many states are not ready at this point.  I don’t really understand the logic in mass voting by the poor but I am also again 14% income tax. I’m willing to stand in line for lower taxes. 

[Rico]

8 minutes ago, angelinkc said:

Generally in the ghetto. Exchange your vote for a few dollars or malt liquor of your  choice

So... Republicans can do this then since all you need is enough malt liquor.

[Lou]

14 minutes ago, Rico said:

So... Republicans can do this then since all you need is enough malt liquor.

Malt liquor is a Dem thing 

[Rico]

Texas going to require you guys to vote in person. 

[AngelsLakersFan]

15 minutes ago, Rico said:

Texas going to require you guys to vote in person. 

Remotely casting their votes against the legality of remote voting.

[angelinkc]

1 hour ago, Rico said:

So... Republicans can do this then since all you need is enough malt liquor.

They have and will do more as this type of voting continues. Eventually the malt liquor runs dry and armed men show up to help fill out your ballot. 

[arch stanton]

Fun fact. The reddest state on Planet Earth has been voting by mail since 2012 and has continues to be redder than an Angels jersey

[angelinkc]

33 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

Fun fact. The reddest state on Planet Earth has been voting by mail since 2012 and has continues to be redder than an Angels jersey

All in how you do it. I prefer a ballot be requested by an individual and returned in person. Postal return is not as good but will work. What the dems are pushing is everyone gets a ballot and allows political parties or paid third parties to go house to house collecting votes.

[arch stanton]

2 hours ago, angelinkc said:

All in how you do it. I prefer a ballot be requested by an individual and returned in person. Postal return is not as good but will work. What the dems are pushing is everyone gets a ballot and allows political parties or paid third parties to go house to house collecting votes.

Doesn't it make sense that registering to vote means you want a ballot? As far as returning the ballots in person, we know that's not going to be possible for everyone so obviously some methods have to be available to those who are unable to do that. This is where you find out who has an agenda and who actually cares about voting rights

[angelinkc]

36 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

Doesn't it make sense that registering to vote means you want a ballot? As far as returning the ballots in person, we know that's not going to be possible for everyone so obviously some methods have to be available to those who are unable to do that. This is where you find out who has an agenda and who actually cares about voting rights

Someone who is too ignorant to mail or hand deliver their vote should not be electing the leader of the free world. The average American has very few civic duties. The voting process is not rocket science. A half ass bulk process opens up massive opportunities of fraud. Every fraudulent vote devalues a vote of another citizen.

[arch stanton]

1 hour ago, angelinkc said:

Someone who is too ignorant to mail or hand deliver their vote should not be electing the leader of the free world. The average American has very few civic duties. The voting process is not rocket science. A half ass bulk process opens up massive opportunities of fraud. Every fraudulent vote devalues a vote of another citizen.

So....agenda. Got it. Thanks

[Redondo]

• Twitter tries to censor Trump with ‘fact check’ but gets its facts wrong on voter fraud

But many states have simply ignored or not had the resources to comply with this requirement, leaving states with inaccurate voter registration lists and certainly ill-prepared for voting by mail.

Allowing states to send all of their recorded registered voters a ballot without making states update their lists of registered voters would unquestionably invite fraud into elections.

Ballots would be mailed to addresses of individuals who have moved or passed away. The new residents may not be eligible to vote but could see the ballots in the mail and try to vote anyway.

At the beginning of May, California and Los Angeles County were required to remove 1.5 million inactive voters from their registration lists when a Judicial Watch lawsuit said Los Angeles County has more registered voters than citizens. You read that correctly – Los Angeles County has more registered voters than citizens.

If Democrats can federally mandate a nationwide all-mail election in November, election officials will be sending out more live ballots than voters, which will lead to fraudulent ballots being returned.

What Democrats are also not telling you is that California allows for ballot harvesting – meaning that any individual can pick up any number of ballots for any reason, completely unchecked.

These harvesters picking up ballots don’t have to show an ID, they don’t have to be a citizen, and they don’t have to be eligible to vote. You expect Americans to believe that having someone who can’t vote picking up ballots won’t invite fraud in our elections?

No one is keeping track of who is picking up thousands of ballots, so how do we know they’re being delivered? How do we know the harvesters aren’t altering votes or pressuring people on how to vote?

 

 

[arch stanton]

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient."

Is adding a fact check actual suppression is somebody hijacking a buzzword to make more out of this than it is?