Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 11-22-2018, 06:38 AM
crucible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,342
and, so, the result of all the state elections was that not much changed, at all. The courts ruled that even though the Republican drawn districts were clearly illegally gerrymandered, there remained not enough time before the election to redraw and represent to the court the new plan. Leastways, that is what I got from the news reports. Anti gerrymandering people still have to be careful about what they ask for. Perfectly allocated districts according to race and party will make it possible for white Republicans to win every race in many states. Sometimes the token district or two drawn to isolate minority or democrat votes away from other purple districts will wind up being the only seats you can win, but you might not have any seats if everything is drawn completely equitably.

I'd like to see the result of drawing lines without respect to race or party, taking a state like North Carolina and if, say, it has 16 congressional districts, divide the state into first, 4 divisions, west to east, containing each 1/4 of the total population. Then, take each of those sections and divide it again, by population, north to south into 4 pieces. The result will be random pieces that all will probably contain some urban, suburban and country voters. One would do that on a computer and see what the result would have been. Naturally, in some places, today, people just don't bother to vote because the result is almost always pre-ordained. This might help.
  #52  
Old 11-22-2018, 08:29 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,754
That's actually not a bad algorithm to use, if your goal is to create gerrymandered districts. If the dividing lines are based on population, then they're probably going to pass through the places where the population is most concentrated, i.e., cities. Which means that each of your cities is going to be cut into multiple districts, and each district will have a mixture of city and country. If the cities represents 55% of the state's population, then they'll also be 55% of each district, and every district will elect a representative of the urban party. If, by contrast, the cities are 45% of the population, then every district will elect a representative of the rural party. When what you should be getting, in either of those cases, is about half each from the urban and rural parties.
  #53  
Old 11-27-2018, 06:44 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,551
The NC State Board of Elections is refusing to certify the 9th district race
Quote:
Election board member Joshua Malcolm raised the issue in what was expected to be a routine certification of the results of North Carolina’s 13 congressional races. He asked the board to remove the 9th District from the list of those to be certified.

“I’m very familiar with unfortunate activities that have been happening down in my part of the state,” vice chair Malcolm, a Robeson County Democrat, told the board. “And I am not going to turn a blind eye to what took place to the best of my understanding which has been ongoing for a number of years that has repeatedly been referred to the United States attorney and the district attorneys for them to take action and clean it up. And in my opinion those things have not taken place.”

Malcolm cited a statute that allows the board the authority to take any necessary action “to assure that an election is determined without taint of fraud or corruption and without irregularities that may have changed the result of an election.”
The story didn't give any clue about what 'unfortunate activities' he was referring to, that hadn't been 'cleaned up.' Any of our NC residents got more info?
  #54  
Old 11-27-2018, 06:52 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,754
Too many Democrats voting?
  #55  
Old 11-27-2018, 06:53 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,300
I found 3 other news stories about the 9th and they all say the same thing as the one you quoted: "no clarification". I did find this in one of the stories tho:
Quote:
During the meeting, he did not give specifics about what might have happened. In a follow-up interview with WFAE Tuesday, Malcolm said the board discussed the 9th District in a closed session. He said he is not allowed to talk about what was said in the meeting.
  #56  
Old 11-27-2018, 07:10 PM
Miller's Avatar
Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 43,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Too many Democrats voting?
Probably not that:

Quote:
Election board member Joshua Malcolm raised the issue in what was expected to be a routine certification of the results of North Carolina’s 13 congressional races. He asked the board to remove the 9th District from the list of those to be certified.

“I’m very familiar with unfortunate activities that have been happening down in my part of the state,” vice chair Malcolm, a Robeson County Democrat, told the board.
  #57  
Old 11-28-2018, 02:26 AM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,198
According to the story I read, it's not just that district that was refused certification; several state legislator districts were also refused certification.

Maybe LHoD has more info...
  #58  
Old 11-28-2018, 10:27 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,551
This Twitter thread by Joe Bruno of WSOC-TV is very informative. DSY mentioned that several state legislator districts were also refused certification; the thread lists them. Also mentions that the NC State Board of Elections is composed of 4 Dems, 4 Republicans, and 1 unaffiliated person, and that the decision to not certify these races was unanimous.

Last edited by RTFirefly; 11-28-2018 at 10:27 AM.
  #59  
Old 11-28-2018, 02:08 PM
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
I'm no expert but in many cases it's not legal to have a law change something that happened in the past. Ex post facto laws are not allowed. No doubt this will be challenged in court.
By that definition of "ex post facto," does that mean that if somebody makes money during 2018, and then income taxes are raised later in the year that affect 2018 income, then that law is ex post facto?

I don't think so. I am under the impression that all "ex post facto" means is, you cannot retroactively make something illegal. That isn't happening in this case.

Somebody might have a case of overturning it on "bill of attainder" grounds (which I think pretty much means "a law that singles someone out for punishment Because We Said So, That's Why"); it depends on how many people it affects.
  #60  
Old 11-29-2018, 10:10 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSYoungEsq View Post
According to the story I read, it's not just that district that was refused certification; several state legislator districts were also refused certification.

Maybe LHoD has more info...
Here's an article.

Short version: it looks like some folks were going to black neighborhoods and telling folks their registration had been dropped. They were encouraged to register for an absentee ballot. Then someone came by the neighborhood to pick up the absentee ballots and turn them in, offering to finish filling the ballots out for them.

I mean, holy shit.

The elections board is getting ready to be dissolved, due to Republican shenanigans; and the board, which unanimously chose not to certify the race, is being accused of partisan bias by the head of the state's GOP, despite being 4/4/1 Democratic/Republican/Independent.

Holy shit.
  #61  
Old 11-30-2018, 07:29 AM
romansperson's Avatar
romansperson is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,593
Here's another article. This isn't the first time strange stuff has happened in that county's elections.
  #62  
Old 11-30-2018, 08:35 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Here's an article.

Short version: it looks like some folks were going to black neighborhoods and telling folks their registration had been dropped. They were encouraged to register for an absentee ballot. Then someone came by the neighborhood to pick up the absentee ballots and turn them in, offering to finish filling the ballots out for them.

I mean, holy shit.
That's a big-fucking-deal crime.
Quote:
The elections board is getting ready to be dissolved, due to Republican shenanigans; and the board, which unanimously chose not to certify the race, is being accused of partisan bias by the head of the state's GOP, despite being 4/4/1 Democratic/Republican/Independent.

Holy shit.
So who takes over the responsibilities of the elections board after it's dissolved? (The WaPo story says "the current board is scheduled to dissolve early next week.") It looks unlikely that they will certify the NC-09 result by then, so who would be legally empowered to make that call afterwards?
  #63  
Old 11-30-2018, 10:51 AM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,198
Rural North Carolina: Mississippi in all but name.

It's hard to tell what was more rampant from the stories: getting people to not vote by collecting (then not turning in) their ballots, or getting people to vote for a specific candidate, by collecting, then "finishing" their ballot for them.

California, btw, now legally allows harvested ballots. Some of California's rural counties aren't so different from North Carolina's.
  #64  
Old 11-30-2018, 11:22 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
It sounds like there's at least one person, McCrae Dowless, that needs to spend a long time looking at the inside of a prison. It looks like he may have engaged in this sort of illegal (and, conservative get ready to roll your eyes, totally racist) voter suppression for years. So the real question is, what other folks knew about what he was doing, and when did they know it?

Anyone who has ever expressed any concern over voter fraud ought to be all over this story.
  #65  
Old 11-30-2018, 02:41 PM
Bijou Drains is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,006
once again they did not certify the 9th district race

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/po...222436915.html
  #66  
Old 12-01-2018, 11:22 AM
romansperson's Avatar
romansperson is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
That's a big-fucking-deal crime. So who takes over the responsibilities of the elections board after it's dissolved? (The WaPo story says "the current board is scheduled to dissolve early next week.") It looks unlikely that they will certify the NC-09 result by then, so who would be legally empowered to make that call afterwards?
No one really knows yet, as the legislature and the governor's office are still negotiating on what happens once the current board dissolves. The court granted a 2-week stay on the dissolution yesterday (Friday the 30th). So for time the time being we just have the usual legislative clusterfuck.
  #67  
Old 12-01-2018, 11:29 AM
Ulf the Unwashed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,323
The House itself has the final say, doesn't it? If this is all swept under the rug and NC eventually declares that there's nothing to see here, move along folks, Harris is the winner, I could see the Democratic-controlled House voting not to seat him come January. It'd be a big in-your-face to all the people who (as LHoD notes) scream and yell and moan about "voter fraud" but don't mind it when it comes from their side of the aisle, and it would ultimately force a new election. Don't know that it would happen that way, but if it looks like this is going to go uninvestigated I'd say there's a decent chance.
  #68  
Old 12-01-2018, 11:40 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
It sounds like there's at least one person, McCrae Dowless, that needs to spend a long time looking at the inside of a prison. It looks like he may have engaged in this sort of illegal (and, conservative get ready to roll your eyes, totally racist) voter suppression for years. So the real question is, what other folks knew about what he was doing, and when did they know it?

Anyone who has ever expressed any concern over voter fraud ought to be all over this story.
Remember how close the 2016 governor race was? McCrae Dowless almost certainly made that election appear to be closer than it actually was as well.
  #69  
Old 12-01-2018, 11:44 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
If there isn't a major investigation, there's no way the House should seat this guy. It's possible that an investigation will clear Dowless of wrongdoing--but if that happens it almost certainly means either someone else is committing voter fraud, or someone else is organizing false affadavits. In any case, though, we really need to get to the bottom of this case. It is different from literally any other voter fraud case I've heard of in 21st century America, but I doubt that it's unique except that other cases have gone undiscovered.
  #70  
Old 12-01-2018, 02:12 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,300
Just wanted to say that I'm glad this thread exists and to give a big "thank you" to alla y'all who've been keeping it updated. This is far from local news for me, but I'm interested and concerned; it's an important story.
  #71  
Old 12-01-2018, 06:29 PM
romansperson's Avatar
romansperson is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,593
The state elections board chairman, Democrat Andy Penry, has now resigned.

Quote:
The Washington Post obtained a letter from Penry to the State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement where he explained that he was stepping away to allow the investigation to continue “free of attempts at distraction and obstruction so that the truth can be revealed.”
Quote:
Penry has received criticism from Republican officials in the state saying that his Twitter posts, some of which are highly critical of President Trump, are proof that the investigation in the 9th District is partisan.
But of course
  #72  
Old 12-02-2018, 07:52 AM
crucible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
That's actually not a bad algorithm to use, if your goal is to create gerrymandered districts. If the dividing lines are based on population, then they're probably going to pass through the places where the population is most concentrated, i.e., cities. Which means that each of your cities is going to be cut into multiple districts, and each district will have a mixture of city and country. If the cities represents 55% of the state's population, then they'll also be 55% of each district, and every district will elect a representative of the urban party. If, by contrast, the cities are 45% of the population, then every district will elect a representative of the rural party. When what you should be getting, in either of those cases, is about half each from the urban and rural parties.
I don't intuitively follow your logic. I do agree that if every district drawn contained an exact mixture of all racial and political populations as in the entire state, the high possibility is that in many cases, minority and minor party voters will be underrepresented in the final results. But, and it is a big but, it would be fairer than having the majority party, elected in great part due to gerrymandered districts, continuing for generations cutting up the districts to insure they will remain in power. I think, with the power of computing these days, any number of simulations based on various district drawing algorithms can be run and the one that seems to accurately represent the overall population of a state chosen. ???
  #73  
Old 12-02-2018, 07:57 AM
crucible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
If there isn't a major investigation, there's no way the House should seat this guy. It's possible that an investigation will clear Dowless of wrongdoing--but if that happens it almost certainly means either someone else is committing voter fraud, or someone else is organizing false affadavits. In any case, though, we really need to get to the bottom of this case. It is different from literally any other voter fraud case I've heard of in 21st century America, but I doubt that it's unique except that other cases have gone undiscovered.
I think it has been recognized. "Harvesting" absentee ballots is a known problem. If, however, a party, knowing the name and address of every registered party member, get such ballots, takes them to the voter, gets their vote and returns the ballot to the polling place, what is so illegal about that? The real problem would be if absentee ballots are illicitly filled out, not by the voter, and slipped into the count later. If I can imagine it, there are those folks who imagine it and do it, probably on both sides.
  #74  
Old 12-02-2018, 08:13 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by crucible View Post
"Harvesting" absentee ballots is a known problem. If, however, a party, knowing the name and address of every registered party member, get such ballots, takes them to the voter, gets their vote and returns the ballot to the polling place, what is so illegal about that?
Shortest answer, what's so illegal about it is that it is (if I understand correctly) against the law.

And I think that law makes sense. (is that the question you were actually asking?) We have a few principles in play. First, ballots should be secret; second, ballots should be uninfluenced by bribes or threats; third, ballots should be secure. Letting political operatives go around picking up ballots to return to the polling place threatens all three principles. The ballots aren't secure, since those political operatives could look at the ballots and throw out the ones they don't like. The ballots may not be secret, for the same reason.

And a political operative could easily set up a reward/threat system: "Hey, if you let me watch you fill out your ballot for Jane Doe, I'll give you a bottle of gin," or, "I work for Mega Furniture Corp, and golly, so do you, and our boss has asked me to check that people are voting the right way, so why don't you fill out your ballot right here?" Of course, they could also be much more subtle than that.

This case illustrates what can go wrong with harvesting ballots. It appears (and please correct me if I'm missing something) that operatives went to poor black neighborhoods and convinced people to sign up for absentee ballots, then told people to turn them in incomplete, looked at the ballots, and either filled them out for the Republican candidate if they were incomplete, or simply threw them away if they included a vote for the Democratic candidate. That sort of behavior is far too easy to do if people can go around collecting ballots; it makes sense to me to have a law against it.
  #75  
Old 12-02-2018, 01:10 PM
Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 13,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Shortest answer, what's so illegal about it is that it is (if I understand correctly) against the law.
Illegal in North Carolina, legal in California since 2016. Reason many Republicans are crying foul about their bloodbath there.

I can see both pros and cons - the idea in CA was simply to make it easier for more people to vote. But the potential for fraud does increase slightly.

Last edited by Tamerlane; 12-02-2018 at 01:13 PM.
  #76  
Old 12-02-2018, 01:59 PM
suranyi is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,867
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane View Post
Illegal in North Carolina, legal in California since 2016. Reason many Republicans are crying foul about their bloodbath there.

I can see both pros and cons - the idea in CA was simply to make it easier for more people to vote. But the potential for fraud does increase slightly.
To me, there seems to be a clear dividing line:

Collecting ballots that have been sealed and signed is fine. That’s a convenience for the voter.

Collecting ballots that have not been sealed should be illegal. There’s a definite potential for tampering there.
__________________
Right now, it’s Girls’ Generation. Tomorrow, it’s Girls’ Generation. Forever, it’s Girls’ Generation!
  #77  
Old 12-02-2018, 02:45 PM
Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 13,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by suranyi View Post
Collecting ballots that have not been sealed should be illegal. There’s a definite potential for tampering there.
No question. I'm fairly sure that is always illegal.

ETA: Also in the CA law as amended - Any person in charge of a vote by mail ballot and who knowingly and willingly engages in criminal acts related to that ballot as described in Division 18 (commencing with Section 18000), including, but not limited to, fraud, bribery, intimidation, and tampering with or failing to deliver the ballot in a timely fashion, is subject to the appropriate punishment specified in that division.

Last edited by Tamerlane; 12-02-2018 at 02:47 PM.
  #78  
Old 12-02-2018, 04:12 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,754
I suppose that you could still go to areas that are likely to vote for your opponent, convince the people there to vote absentee, collect their ballots, and then throw them all out, thereby disenfranchising all those who would have voted anyway. Which would still be illegal, if you got caught, but might be a little more difficult to prove.
  #79  
Old 12-02-2018, 07:16 PM
Fiveyearlurker is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,474
For what it's worth, Nate Silver has stated that the most likely explanation for the irregularities in NC is fraud.

"The simplest explanation for these irregularities is that someone associated with the @MarkHarrisNC9 campaign committed fraud involving absentee-by-mail ballots in both the primary and the general. I'm open to other explanations, but I haven't heard any yet."
  #80  
Old 12-02-2018, 07:20 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
I suppose that you could still go to areas that are likely to vote for your opponent, convince the people there to vote absentee, collect their ballots, and then throw them all out, thereby disenfranchising all those who would have voted anyway. Which would still be illegal, if you got caught, but might be a little more difficult to prove.
I think folks who vote absentee can check whether their ballots were ever received. If a large group of people sign affidavits that Joe Schmoe (or "this tall lanky-looking white dude with glasses and a buzz cut") collected their ballots, and that they were never received, prosecution would be possible.
  #81  
Old 12-02-2018, 07:41 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,094
My state requires that I designate ahead of time if someone else is going to turn in my ballot.

It also limits 2 ballots per bearer, however. Probably to prevent stuff like this.
  #82  
Old 12-02-2018, 07:46 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 16,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
My state requires that I designate ahead of time if someone else is going to turn in my ballot.

It also limits 2 ballots per bearer, however. Probably to prevent stuff like this.
Not if they're just going to throw them away.
  #83  
Old 12-02-2018, 08:20 PM
Railer13 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
It appears (and please correct me if I'm missing something) that operatives went to poor black neighborhoods and convinced people to sign up for absentee ballots, then told people to turn them in incomplete, looked at the ballots, and either filled them out for the Republican candidate if they were incomplete, or simply threw them away if they included a vote for the Democratic candidate.
I don't think this is quite right, although there may be cases of the activity that you describe. According to the Washington Post:

Quote:
The board is collecting sworn statements from voters in rural Bladen and Robeson counties, near the South Carolina border, who described people coming to their doors and urging them to hand over their absentee ballots, sometimes without filling them out. Others described receiving absentee ballots by mail that they had not requested. It is illegal to take someone else’s ballot and turn it in.
  #84  
Old 12-02-2018, 08:54 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Kitchen View Post
Not if they're just going to throw them away.
Well, yeah, but it says it on the form to go get the absentee ballot, where you have to name your "bearer." If the same person's name is on more than two forms, then they know there's something up. And you know that anyone saying they're taking a bunch of ballots is lying.

Last edited by BigT; 12-02-2018 at 08:56 PM.
  #85  
Old 12-02-2018, 08:58 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Railer13 View Post
I don't think this is quite right, although there may be cases of the activity that you describe. According to the Washington Post:
Part of the story is that there were a lot more absentee ballots requested in this county than were actually turned in--thus my suspicion that ballots were being thrown away if they were for the Democratic candidate.
  #86  
Old 12-02-2018, 09:06 PM
Railer13 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Part of the story is that there were a lot more absentee ballots requested in this county than were actually turned in--thus my suspicion that ballots were being thrown away if they were for the Democratic candidate.
Yeah, that's a good point. Looks like there were plenty of shenanigans regarding the absentee ballots.

Last edited by Railer13; 12-02-2018 at 09:06 PM.
  #87  
Old 12-03-2018, 05:18 PM
Bijou Drains is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,006
Nate Silver tweeted he thinks a new election in NC 9 is pretty likely. When was the last time a congressional election was redone due to fraud?
  #88  
Old 12-03-2018, 07:21 PM
galen ubal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,556
This just came across my Twitter feed:
Quote:
EXCLUSIVE: Absentee ballot witness says she was hired by McCrae Dowless to collect ballots & deliver them to him. When asked if she was told to tell people about certain candidates she said,

"(Sheriff) McVicker & Harris. That's who he was working for"
From here.

Also, in one county, a very few people were picking up the absentee ballots, in the employ of Dowless. Pick them up, and deliver the ballots to Dowless.

Last edited by galen ubal; 12-03-2018 at 07:23 PM.
  #89  
Old 12-03-2018, 07:52 PM
Fiveyearlurker is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,474
For what it's worth, Republicans tried to steal an election, and it's barely in the news. Tell me again about the MSM liberal bias.
  #90  
Old 12-03-2018, 08:09 PM
galen ubal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,556
There is a story about it in the Washington Post.

It's funny how Republicans are screaming about voter fraud, and pushing for laws...that have no effect on the type of fraud they've apparently been committing. The laws they're pushing for would only have an effect on fraud that is vanishingly rare, but disproportionately affect the lower economic tier of people.
  #91  
Old 12-03-2018, 09:24 PM
Derleth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Missoula, Montana, USA
Posts: 21,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
There is a story about it in the Washington Post.

It's funny how Republicans are screaming about voter fraud, and pushing for laws...that have no effect on the type of fraud they've apparently been committing. The laws they're pushing for would only have an effect on fraud that is vanishingly rare, but disproportionately affect the lower economic tier of people.
They scream about voter fraud while committing electoral fraud, and try like Hell to convince you there's no difference.

Honest people don't dissemble and conflate like that.
  #92  
Old 12-03-2018, 10:05 PM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,198
Another story about the person who stated she was paid to collect ballots:

The Hill
  #93  
Old 12-04-2018, 07:54 AM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 82,834
Here's CNN Politics's story on it: https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/03/polit...ace/index.html
  #94  
Old 12-04-2018, 09:19 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,714
I wonder if Republicans have ever considered that they might win more net voters by championing the expansion of voting rights than they do by actually suppressing opposition votes? Maybe win more support and do the right thing at the same time. Or is this a case similar to that of John Dean's recount of Watergate -- "no one ever actually suggested that there not be a coverup?" Do you ever discuss doing this at party policy meetings?

Apologies if I'm repeating myself. This is a big forum, my search skills are poor and my memory worse.
  #95  
Old 12-04-2018, 10:14 AM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,198
Not to hijack the thread, but Red Wiggler, if the GOP were smart, they'd have learned from what happened to them in California after championing Prop. 187 and stop being anti-immigrant. Hispanics in America are natural conservative voters: strong on family, great at small business, and generally conservative socially. But it's far more important to pander to the xenophobes than to grow the party's base.

Last edited by DSYoungEsq; 12-04-2018 at 10:15 AM.
  #96  
Old 12-04-2018, 11:38 AM
you with the face is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Hill
Ginger Eason told WSOCTV, a local news station in Charlotte, that Leslie McCrae Dowless, Jr. paid her between $75 and $100 to pick up completed absentee ballots for North Carolina's 9th District, the results of which are being officially investigated.
I guess Dowless didn’t think he needed to pay her enough to buy her silence. Oops.
  #97  
Old 12-04-2018, 12:09 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 82,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSYoungEsq View Post
Not to hijack the thread, but Red Wiggler, if the GOP were smart, they'd have learned from what happened to them in California after championing Prop. 187 and stop being anti-immigrant. Hispanics in America are natural conservative voters: strong on family, great at small business, and generally conservative socially. But it's far more important to pander to the xenophobes than to grow the party's base.
They can also tell themselves - accurately, I'm sorry to say - that Latinos still don't vote as much as you might think they would, given the relentlessly anti-immigrant rhetoric and policies of the Trump GOP.
  #98  
Old 12-04-2018, 04:48 PM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
They can also tell themselves - accurately, I'm sorry to say - that Latinos still don't vote as much as you might think they would, given the relentlessly anti-immigrant rhetoric and policies of the Trump GOP.
Maybe, but the fallout from the Prop 187 stupidity has resulted in the Republican Party being almost non-existent any more in California. A VERY large chunk of that is Hispanic voting.

Back to the regularly scheduled North Carolina shenanigans thread.
  #99  
Old 12-04-2018, 04:51 PM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,198
So today's Charlotte Observer has a story about this guy who allegedly paid the woman mentioned in the above threads. Turns out he is a convicted felon, whose crime was insurance fraud. He ALSO was previously convicted of felonious perjury. JUST the sort of guy you want to hire to run a third-party operation on the grassroots efforts of your campaign, right?
  #100  
Old 12-04-2018, 07:41 PM
boytyperanma is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leominster MA
Posts: 5,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSYoungEsq View Post
So today's Charlotte Observer has a story about this guy who allegedly paid the woman mentioned in the above threads. Turns out he is a convicted felon, whose crime was insurance fraud. He ALSO was previously convicted of felonious perjury. JUST the sort of guy you want to hire to run a third-party operation on the grassroots efforts of your campaign, right?
Absolutely, then if he gets caught you can claim he acted on his own and anything he says to the contrary is the word of a lying perjurer. He's only naming other people to get a deal, we never knew that guy!
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017