The Republican Strategy To Win (Cheat) At Elections

Hello T. A. Gardner,

Mary Trump has a long history of dissing Donald. She clearly hates him and is willing to put into print any innuendo, rumor, half-truth, and gossip she can to trash him. It's not like I care for or like the Don. I think he's a world-class troll and asshole among other negatives. But I also don't put any faith in a female relative that has an axe to grind with him being truthful, honest, or fair in publishing what amounts to a tome of gossip on him.

She is a professional. Her insight into his psyche is quite valuable. It comes across very professional.
 
Hello T. A. Gardner,

Voter fraud is rare now, but HR 1 makes it possible for all sorts of hard to detect fraud to be run on a massive scale. To wit:

Since voters can register on-line and through third parties like political organizations, there is all sorts of potential for someone to fraudulently register and go undetected.
There is no voter ID requirement to vote
Most or even all balloting is done via mail
Ballot harvesting is legal so anyone can handle ballots.
16 and 17 year-olds get registered to vote when they get a driver's license. The bill provides they can't vote but suffer no consequences if they "accidently" do. They would likely get mailed a ballot being registered to vote since there is no provision for flagging them as ineligible other than their own recognizance.
There is a voting 'season' if you will that lasts a month or more. This gives someone intent on mass fraud lots of time to carry it out.
There's more in it than that.

The point is, it opens the door to massive, hard to detect, fraud in elections.

Campaigning is not limited to a season. Why should voting be severely limited?

There are checks and double checks to prevent any of the possibilities you outlined.

OTOH, the Republican measures are all clearly designed to reduce voter turn out, particularly among the poor.

There's the fraud. They are trying to affect the elections before they ever happen.

It's Jim Crow 2.0.
 
Anyone could register via the internet to vote:

OK...first of all, that's not Section 6, like you claimed it was before, was it?

So now you're doing the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy to make your shitty argument valid even after it was invalidated by the text itself.

That happened because you plagiarized your "analysis" from someone else...someone who did really shitty work that you...want to take credit for?

So since that is now out of the way, we can get to the meat of the text itself:

ART 1—PROMOTING INTERNET REGISTRATION
Sec. 1001. Requiring availability of internet for voter registration.
Sec. 1002. Use of internet to update registration information.HT
Sec. 1003. Provision of election information by electronic mail to individuals
registered to vote.
Sec. 1004. Clarification of requirement regarding necessary information to
show eligibility to vote.
Sec. 1005. Prohibiting State from requiring applicants to provide more than
last 4 digits of Social Security number.
Sec. 1006. Report on data collection.
Sec. 1007. Permitting voter registration application form to serve as application
for absentee ballot.
Sec. 1008. Effective date.

OK, so what you quoted here wasn't the actual text that laid any of this out, but rather a "table of contents" that requires you to look deeper and further into the bill, which you don't do because you're lazy.

So let's use the first one, for example, and look at what the text of that section is, instead of using the title of the section as a Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy, which is what you did:

Sec. 1001. Requiring availability of internet for voter registration:

SEC. 1001. Requiring availability of internet for voter registration.
(a) Requiring Availability of internet for Registration.—The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (52 U.S.C. 20501 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 6 the following new section:

“SEC. 6A. Internet registration.

“(a) Requiring Availability of internet for Online Registration.—Each State, acting through the chief State election official, shall ensure that the following services are available to the public at any time on the official public websites of the appropriate State and local election officials in the State, in the same manner and subject to the same terms and conditions as the services provided by voter registration agencies under section 7(a):

“(1) Online application for voter registration.

“(2) Online assistance to applicants in applying to register to vote.

“(3) Online completion and submission by applicants of the mail voter registration application form prescribed by the Election Assistance Commission pursuant to section 9(a)(2), including assistance with providing a signature as required under subsection (c)).

“(4) Online receipt of completed voter registration applications.

“(b) Acceptance of completed applications.—A State shall accept an online voter registration application provided by an individual under this section, and ensure that the individual is registered to vote in the State, if—

“(1) the individual meets the same voter registration requirements applicable to individuals who register to vote by mail in accordance with section 6(a)(1) using the mail voter registration application form prescribed by the Election Assistance Commission pursuant to section 9(a)(2); and

“(2) the individual meets the requirements of subsection (c) to provide a signature in electronic form (but only in the case of applications submitted during or after the second year in which this section is in effect in the State).

“(c) Signature requirements.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of this section, an individual meets the requirements of this subsection as follows:

“(A) In the case of an individual who has a signature on file with a State agency, including the State motor vehicle authority, that is required to provide voter registration services under this Act or any other law, the individual consents to the transfer of that electronic signature.

“(B) If subparagraph (A) does not apply, the individual submits with the application an electronic copy of the individual’s handwritten signature through electronic means.

“(C) If subparagraph (A) and subparagraph (B) do not apply, the individual executes a computerized mark in the signature field on an online voter registration application, in accordance with reasonable security measures established by the State, but only if the State accepts such mark from the individual.

“(2) TREATMENT OF INDIVIDUALS UNABLE TO MEET REQUIREMENT.—If an individual is unable to meet the requirements of paragraph (1), the State shall—

“(A) permit the individual to complete all other elements of the online voter registration application;

“(B) permit the individual to provide a signature at the time the individual requests a ballot in an election (whether the individual requests the ballot at a polling place or requests the ballot by mail); and

“(C) if the individual carries out the steps described in subparagraph (A) and subparagraph (B), ensure that the individual is registered to vote in the State.

“(3) NOTICE.—The State shall ensure that individuals applying to register to vote online are notified of the requirements of paragraph (1) and of the treatment of individuals unable to meet such requirements, as described in paragraph (2).

“(d) Confirmation and disposition.—

“(1) CONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT.—Upon the online submission of a completed voter registration application by an individual under this section, the appropriate State or local election official shall send the individual a notice confirming the State’s receipt of the application and providing instructions on how the individual may check the status of the application.

“(2) NOTICE OF DISPOSITION.—Not later than 7 days after the appropriate State or local election official has approved or rejected an application submitted by an individual under this section, the official shall send the individual a notice of the disposition of the application.

“(3) METHOD OF NOTIFICATION.—The appropriate State or local election official shall send the notices required under this subsection by regular mail and—

“(A) in the case of an individual who has provided the official with an electronic mail address, by electronic mail; and

“(B) at the option of the individual, by text message.

“(e) Provision of Services in Nonpartisan Manner.—The services made available under subsection (a) shall be provided in a manner that ensures that, consistent with section 7(a)(5)—

“(1) the online application does not seek to influence an applicant’s political preference or party registration; and

“(2) there is no display on the website promoting any political preference or party allegiance, except that nothing in this paragraph may be construed to prohibit an applicant from registering to vote as a member of a political party.

“(f) Protection of Security of Information.—In meeting the requirements of this section, the State shall establish appropriate technological security measures to prevent to the greatest extent practicable any unauthorized access to information provided by individuals using the services made available under subsection (a).

“(g) Accessibility of services.—A state shall ensure that the services made available under this section are made available to individuals with disabilities to the same extent as services are made available to all other individuals.

“(h) Use of Additional Telephone-Based System.—A State shall make the services made available online under subsection (a) available through the use of an automated telephone-based system, subject to the same terms and conditions applicable under this section to the services made available online, in addition to making the services available online in accordance with the requirements of this section.

“(i) Nondiscrimination among registered voters using mail and online registration.—In carrying out this Act, the Help America Vote Act of 2002, or any other Federal, State, or local law governing the treatment of registered voters in the State or the administration of elections for public office in the State, a State shall treat a registered voter who registered to vote online in accordance with this section in the same manner as the State treats a registered voter who registered to vote by mail.”.

(b) Special requirements for individuals using online registration.—

(1) TREATMENT AS INDIVIDUALS REGISTERING TO VOTE BY MAIL FOR PURPOSES OF FIRST-TIME VOTER IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.—Section 303(b)(1)(A) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (52 U.S.C. 21083(b)(1)(A)) is amended by striking “by mail” and inserting “by mail or online under section 6A of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993”.

(2) REQUIRING SIGNATURE FOR FIRST-TIME VOTERS IN JURISDICTION.—Section 303(b) of such Act (52 U.S.C. 21083(b)) is amended—

(A) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and

(B) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following new paragraph:


“(5) SIGNATURE REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRST-TIME VOTERS USING ONLINE REGISTRATION.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—A State shall, in a uniform and nondiscriminatory manner, require an individual to meet the requirements of subparagraph (B) if—

“(i) the individual registered to vote in the State online under section 6A of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993; and

“(ii) the individual has not previously voted in an election for Federal office in the State.

“(B) REQUIREMENTS.—An individual meets the requirements of this subparagraph if—

“(i) in the case of an individual who votes in person, the individual provides the appropriate State or local election official with a handwritten signature; or

“(ii) in the case of an individual who votes by mail, the individual submits with the ballot a handwritten signature.

“(C) INAPPLICABILITY.—Subparagraph (A) does not apply in the case of an individual who is—

“(i) entitled to vote by absentee ballot under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (52 U.S.C. 20302 et seq.);

“(ii) provided the right to vote otherwise than in person under section 3(b)(2)(B)(ii) of the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act (52 U.S.C. 20102(b)(2)(B)(ii)); or

“(iii) entitled to vote otherwise than in person under any other Federal law.”.

(3) CONFORMING AMENDMENT RELATING TO EFFECTIVE DATE.—Section 303(d)(2)(A) of such Act (52 U.S.C. 21083(d)(2)(A)) is amended by striking “Each State” and inserting “Except as provided in subsection (b)(5), each State”.

(c) Conforming Amendments.—

(1) TIMING OF REGISTRATION.—Section 8(a)(1) of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (52 U.S.C. 20507(a)(1)) is amended—

(A) by striking “and” at the end of subparagraph (C);

(B) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E); and

(C) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new subparagraph:


“(D) in the case of online registration through the official public website of an election official under section 6A, if the valid voter registration application is submitted online not later than the lesser of 28 days, or the period provided by State law, before the date of the election (as determined by treating the date on which the application is sent electronically as the date on which it is submitted); and”.

(2) INFORMING APPLICANTS OF ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND PENALTIES.—Section 8(a)(5) of such Act (52 U.S.C. 20507(a)(5)) is amended by striking “and 7” and inserting “6A, and 7”.

So as you scroll through this Section, what do you find? Oh tons of eligibility requirements and penalties!

What you are doing, rather dishonestly, is pulling certain parts of the bill out of context, lying about what they say, and ignoring the entirety of the text and section language...because had you gone through this line by line, like I have, you would not find anything here to object to. All of the same requirements for registering to vote in person are applied to the internet.

So why did you lie to me about reading this bill?
 
All they have are the tactics of the likes of Saul Alinsky (Rules for Radicals), and Hitler (The Big Lie). Nothing new, just a repetition of the failures of the past. One thing they do rely on is rigging the rules in the States they control to insure fewer people can exercise the right to vote. So far all that has done is encourage others to vote, and then they lose. Mary Trump wrote an excellent article abut her uncle Donald, and there was one part I found to be even more exceptional. I don't expect the low IQ right winger to read it, however, for the intelligent people it is still a good read:

"It’s impossible to understand the appeal Donald has for his followers if we try to do so from the perspective of people who value honor, decency, empathy, and kindness in their leaders. It isn’t that they see things in Donald that aren’t there. They identify with what is—the brazenness of his lies, his ability to commit crimes with impunity, his bottomless sense of grievance, his monumental insecurity, his bullying, and, perhaps most intriguing, the fact that he is an inveterate failure who keeps being allowed to succeed. Donald is their proxy and their representative. And their ardor has only seemed to grow since his loss. We need only look at data from North Carolina Senate candidate Ted Budd’s campaign to see how complete this identification is. When Republican primary voters were told that Budd had been endorsed by Donald, there was a 45-point net swing in his favor, skyrocketing him to a 19-point lead over his primary opponent. The idea that any other one-term president (George H.W. Bush or Jimmy Carter) would have had the same kind of influence is laughable. On the other hand, though, neither one of them would have tried.

By the same token, elected Republicans, Donald’s chief enablers, see Donald as a means of perpetuating their own power. But they aren’t just putting up with the worst of him simply because they see him as a means to an end. He is them. They value his mendacity and his name-calling and his autocracy because these work for them as well.

Republicans counter truth with absurdity, rendering the truth inoperable. Now a party of fascists, they call Democrats socialist communist Marxists, which is effective in part because it is so nonsensical and in part because they are never asked to define the terms. They cover up their massive (and successful) efforts at voter suppression with wild claims of widespread voter fraud, which essentially doesn’t exist—31 incidents in over a billion votes cast, a number so vanishingly small as to have no meaning.

The main mechanism by which they can successfully carry out these sleights of hand is fear. Whether it’s drug dealers from Mexico or caravans from Central America or Democratic presidents coming for your guns, abolishing religion, or letting gay people get married, they need to keep their voters afraid.

Mr. Lockwood, the frame-narrator of Wuthering Heights, describes a feverish nightmare in which, during a blizzard, he sees a child outside his window begging to be let in. He is so undone by the appearance of this wraith that he drags its wrist across the broken pane of glass, until its blood soaks his bedsheets. “Terror made me cruel,” he says. Fear is a deeply unpleasant emotion, and Republicans have become expert at stoking it, on the one hand, and transforming it into anger on the other. This state of affairs makes it much easier for their followers to become comfortable with the cruelty of their leaders—whether of policy or of action—as long as it is directed at groups they’ve been told they should fear. It also makes it easier for the Republican rank and file to be comfortable with their own cruelty—it feels better than fear, and it allows them to delude themselves into thinking they have some measure of control, because they have been granted permission by the powers that be to express their cruelty with impunity."

https://newrepublic.com/article/163115/donald-trump-plot-against-america

You are describing Democrats and Biden. Inversion fallacies.
 
Republicans know their platform, policies, beliefs, and ideas are toxic and can't win in any election without help.

You are describing Democrats again. Inversion fallacy. There was no election in 2020. The election faulted due to election fraud by Democrats.
 
ou are the one that used a variant of the Texas Sharpshooter. You threw in Section 1002 while ignoring Section 1001

You goddamned fucking moron.

What you are quoting is the table of contents.

But you can't seem to get past the table of contents...so when it says "registration", you're just fixating on the "registration" and nothing else...that's the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy...you saw the words "internet" and "registration" and nothing else.
 
I read that article linked in the OP. A lengthy diatribe of typical Leftist POV's covering all the usual TDS subjects. Okay, it was Mary L. Trump's opinion and nothing more. There wasn't a scintilla of fact about what the GOP / Republican's "strategy to win elections" was or is. Nothing, nada, zip-point-shit. It was just the usual flaming of Trump using the same tired arguments. Nothing new, nothing revelatory, nothing worth perusing.

It was a long winded, vacuous op ed by a Trump hater. I can get the Trump hating, but don't try to turn an empty article into some sort of proof of anything.

It was describing Democrats and Biden as well, not Trump nor conservatives. A classic case of an inversion. They are still trying to project their own problems on someone else.
 
You are the one that used a variant of the Texas Sharpshooter. You threw in Section 1002 while ignoring Section 1001

You're the one who quoted Section 1002 first, jackass. Check the thread.

Now, you're going back to Section 1001, but you're still just using the table of contents.

Because you're fucking lazy.
 
That's but one example of your selective use of the contents of the bill.

You aren't even using the text from the bill, you are just using the table of contents.

You didn't scroll down to the actual text of any of the Sections because if you had, you would have seen all the eligibility requirements.
 
That's but one example of your selective use of the contents of the bill.

I have done nothing more than post the entirety of the section for you to show all of us what you are talking about.

All you seem capable of doing is referencing the bill's table of contents.

And you do it over and over and in doing so, are using the very same fallacy you accuse others of doing.
 
OK...first of all, that's not Section 6, like you claimed it was before, was it?

So now you're doing the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy to make your shitty argument valid even after it was invalidated by the text itself.

That happened because you plagiarized your "analysis" from someone else...someone who did really shitty work that you...want to take credit for?

So since that is now out of the way, we can get to the meat of the text itself:



OK, so what you quoted here wasn't the actual text that laid any of this out, but rather a "table of contents" that requires you to look deeper and further into the bill, which you don't do because you're lazy.

So let's use the first one, for example, and look at what the text of that section is, instead of using the title of the section as a Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy, which is what you did:

Sec. 1001. Requiring availability of internet for voter registration:



So as you scroll through this Section, what do you find? Oh tons of eligibility requirements and penalties!

What you are doing, rather dishonestly, is pulling certain parts of the bill out of context, lying about what they say, and ignoring the entirety of the text and section language...because had you gone through this line by line, like I have, you would not find anything here to object to. All of the same requirements for registering to vote in person are applied to the internet.

So why did you lie to me about reading this bill?

Now we're into trivial objections coupled with more ad hominem....
 
do make mistakes and and can be wrong.

I have never once seen you admit on JPP that you have ever been wrong or made a mistake.

The fact of the matter is that you're a plagiarist and hack...you lie about reading things, you lie about taking notes, you lie about coming up with your own ideas, and you lie because that's all you know how to do anymore.

You are not any kind of deep thinker or intellectual.

You're a fraud and a phony.

Not a single original thought has ever come from that small mind of yours...you borrow, steal, crib, hack, or just plain plagiarize the work of people you think are smart, but are really just as fucking dumb as you.
 
How many millions of dollars have Trump and the reds wasted chasing down the election rabbithole. The fact is every single attempt they created failed. yet they still believe and keep spending more time and money. Is it possible for Trumpys to learn? It does not show.
 
But that doesn't make me a liar or a fraud

Hacking the work of people slightly less stupider than you does make you a liar and a fraud.

You lied to me about reading HR 1, then you lied to me again about the bill by posting its table of contents.

Not once have you even bothered to post the sections of the bill in their entirety, pointing out the parts that support your argument.

You didn't do that...all you did was post the table of contents, and then when I posted the actual text of those sections, not the table of contents, you don't even address it.

FUCKING LAZY.


delusional ravings of insane Leftists who can't stand anyone questioning anything they believe in in the least

You're not questioning anything here...you're just plain LYING.

I tore it apart in that other thread, and I'm tearing it apart again here.

You're so fucking lazy, you quote the table of contents and think that it's somehow supportive of your argument.

The bar is so low it's lying on the fucking floor with you, isn't it?
 
uch tards go and look for every trivial objection they can find to try and defend the indefensible.

"Trivial objection"? You're the one talking out of your ass here about a bill you didn't read, but lied to me about reading nonetheless.

I'm supposed to coddle that?
 
Sometimes, for the sane it's just not worth continuing to argue with an insane idiot.

You fucking lied about reading the bill.

You fucking lied about what the bill said.

You fucking lied about taking notes on the bill.

You fucking lied about the bill by posting its table of contents and pretending as if that sharpshooter fallacy attempt wasn't.

And now you're doing exactly what you did on the other thread: run away like a fucking loser because you can't defend the actions you've taken.

You lied about a bill you don't like not because the bill is bad, but because you are.
 
Voter fraud is rare now, but HR 1 makes it possible for all sorts of hard to detect fraud to be run on a massive scale. To wit:

Since voters can register on-line and through third parties like political organizations, there is all sorts of potential for someone to fraudulently register and go undetected.
There is no voter ID requirement to vote
Most or even all balloting is done via mail
Ballot harvesting is legal so anyone can handle ballots.
16 and 17 year-olds get registered to vote when they get a driver's license. The bill provides they can't vote but suffer no consequences if they "accidently" do. They would likely get mailed a ballot being registered to vote since there is no provision for flagging them as ineligible other than their own recognizance.
There is a voting 'season' if you will that lasts a month or more. This gives someone intent on mass fraud lots of time to carry it out.
There's more in it than that.

The point is, it opens the door to massive, hard to detect, fraud in elections.

All of this is bullshit that TA Gardner tried to pass off on another thread, but was summarily rejected and humiliated, so he's trying it again on this thread.

But we've been through this already: https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...Republican-Party/page40&p=4696847#post4696847
 
Back
Top