Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Great. Could you please show your proof? EFerrari Jun 2012 #1
The proof is on the voter fraud believers, not me! Prove fraud in Wisconsin! Logical Jun 2012 #6
Not really. Before you ask anyone to prove there was fraud EFerrari Jun 2012 #8
Wow, that's the same logic the Birthers use GarroHorus Jun 2012 #14
No. Birthers reject the state certified proof of live birth. EFerrari Jun 2012 #16
And you are rejecting the state certified election results. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #17
Hoisted by your own bad comparison. EFerrari Jun 2012 #44
Optiscan ballots exist with a chain of custody GarroHorus Jun 2012 #46
Chain of custody broken in Ohio in 2004, in San Diego in 2006, in New Hampshire in 2008, EFerrari Jun 2012 #98
I think that E Ferrarai's query is a valid one. truedelphi Jun 2012 #47
In the same way that innocence is assumed in a court of law, HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #49
You are comparing apples and hub caps. EFerrari Jun 2012 #51
No, he is not: you simply do not have the proof to offer that has been requested of you repeatedly. apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #53
the proof is that there is no proof. SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #65
This...and tinfoil hats... 414 Jun 2012 #121
Concerning this "long history of questioning hidden election results" HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #78
Wait, you and others on this thread are accepting a result reflexively because it was presented EFerrari Jun 2012 #82
Yes, we accept the result. HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #119
Poll watchers can't watch the tabulation and they have no way to verify it EFerrari Jun 2012 #132
We are in agreement that the audit needs to be done. HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #134
This is not a criminal case, there is no innocent until proven guilty in transparency matters Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #54
That's exactly right Scootaloo Jun 2012 #124
That is utter tripe. The default position of any scientist or computer programmer eridani Jun 2012 #126
There are right-wingers who think the results of the 2008 election were not valid. ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #102
Why would anyone be against transparent elections? EFerrari Jun 2012 #108
Absolutely he did ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #138
What was transparent about the 2008 election? EFerrari Jun 2012 #141
I know you think this is a clever tactic, but, in fact, the burden of proof is on YOU and others apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #52
Why should the burden of proof be on us? Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #55
Because there is a presumption of legitimacy of elections... Chan790 Jun 2012 #60
I am not asserting anything, those who say it is legitimate are making assertions Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #71
Provide evidence of fraud, or go away and cease embarrasing DU. It is that simple. n/t. apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #77
You obviously do not want transparency in government Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #79
Provide evidence of fraud, or go away and cease embarrasing DU. It is that simple. n/t. apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #88
How can you prove evidence of fraud laundry_queen Jun 2012 #95
Maybe, just maybe SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #96
Provide evidence of fraud, or go away and cease embarrasing DU. It is that simple. n/t. apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #147
Who knew laundry_queen Jun 2012 #148
LOL at your call for transparency... 414 Jun 2012 #122
This is nothing like voter ID laws Bjorn Against Jun 2012 #135
Elections departments should be required to present evidence about eridani Jun 2012 #127
Bad intent isn't even necessary for bad results. The software could simply be crap gkhouston Jun 2012 #131
And even if it isn't crap, screwups can still happen. eridani Jun 2012 #145
I know. All true and no need to prove it. But, L. Coyote Jun 2012 #56
The proof of validity rests on the people presenting the results. EFerrari Jun 2012 #57
No, proof of validity rests on the person asserting fraud. Chan790 Jun 2012 #64
I've been pondering just this question cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #72
Nope. I haven't asserted fraud. EFerrari Jun 2012 #81
Your correct in that you haven't asserted fraud SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #93
The problem with the idea that poll watchers or the DoJ watched this election closely EFerrari Jun 2012 #97
So we're right back where we started form SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #100
In this thread, we've determined that our votes are not counted in public EFerrari Jun 2012 #112
Horseshit. If I give you a lab report asserting that there are x parts per million eridani Jun 2012 #129
Prove the entire government isn't being run by lizard people 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #105
Try reading the thread. n/t EFerrari Jun 2012 #109
Any post in particular? 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #113
That's okay. I doubt they trust you, either. n/t EFerrari Jun 2012 #118
Prove it. 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #133
A nice sane post. Too many conspiracy theories here in virgogal Jun 2012 #2
Fine. Then please show me the votes. EFerrari Jun 2012 #3
If that's how you feel,so be it. virgogal Jun 2012 #10
It isn't how I "feel", but what I expect from an election. EFerrari Jun 2012 #12
He;s not an elections official, EFerrari GarroHorus Jun 2012 #15
The conspiracy theory is that you can know the results of an election counted in secret. EFerrari Jun 2012 #22
The votes in Wisconsin were counted PUBLICLY. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #23
Um, no, they aren't. You're out of your depth. n/t EFerrari Jun 2012 #37
Oh, yes they are. Take off the tinfoil. n/t GarroHorus Jun 2012 #40
Let's see. Touch screens cannot be counted in public. EFerrari Jun 2012 #41
Citizen Observers at every vote tally location GarroHorus Jun 2012 #45
The name you want is PeaceNikki. EFerrari Jun 2012 #48
Whatever could you mean by that? eomer Jun 2012 #39
Maybe the poster means that they looked at the machine totals twice. n/t EFerrari Jun 2012 #42
The machine is in a public place when it reports the tally? L. Coyote Jun 2012 #69
One election we lose due to fraud DOES = every election is suspcious I'm not going to forget Bush 01 uponit7771 Jun 2012 #4
It was in 2000. nt EFerrari Jun 2012 #11
We need to worry about both, actually Warpy Jun 2012 #5
With a system like ours fraud plays a part in... polichick Jun 2012 #7
You're far too, Logical. MineralMan Jun 2012 #9
Sadly, I think you're right about one thing. AverageJoe90 Jun 2012 #21
I was going to say sharp_stick Jun 2012 #13
Election fraud gave us Bush in 2000 and 2004. EOTE Jun 2012 #18
In 2000, it was a voter roll purge. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #20
Like it matters? EOTE Jun 2012 #24
There is a problem with the "Had the recount continued to completion" thing. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #26
He had to proceed with his most viable option. EOTE Jun 2012 #28
The voter purge was legal in Florida at the time GarroHorus Jun 2012 #29
So it's perfectly legal to remove legal voters from the rolls EOTE Jun 2012 #30
Yep, it was perfectly legal. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #31
Gotcha, it's perfectly legal to purge legitimate voters from the voter rolls. EOTE Jun 2012 #83
Apples to oranges, chief. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #84
The law said NOTHING about removing LEGITIMATE VOTERS from the voter rolls. EOTE Jun 2012 #85
The law gave the authority to remove voters from the rolls GarroHorus Jun 2012 #89
Nice citation there, chief. EOTE Jun 2012 #90
you know, your idiocy with the "chief" bullshit ends here GarroHorus Jun 2012 #91
Another brilliant reply. EOTE Jun 2012 #92
Lots of folks with right-wing talking points here these days. HiPointDem Jun 2012 #34
What right wing talking points? GarroHorus Jun 2012 #38
It's RW talking points because SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #67
Ain't that the truth. EOTE Jun 2012 #86
Wrong. Zoeisright Jun 2012 #144
Yes, Gore would have won had all the votes been ciunted. GarroHorus Jun 2012 #146
Right. You are delusional if you think that the Ohio county that eridani Jun 2012 #130
True, but if there are reports of such...... AverageJoe90 Jun 2012 #19
The problem is Citizen United, but not Election Fraud? RC Jun 2012 #25
Because it is legal! Remember? Logical Jun 2012 #27
We know Repukes will cheat. I think they cheat whether they need to or not. As far as I am concerned rhett o rick Jun 2012 #32
Right sure they should, ridiculous way of thinking. Rex Jun 2012 #33
Pardon me, but don't we need to be concerned about BOTH? What about Florida? Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2012 #35
Voter caging in Florida altered the national political landscape and impacted the world L. Coyote Jun 2012 #70
Certainly not at this margin - lynne Jun 2012 #36
In the absence of transparent elections, we have no way to assess the truth of your assertion. n/t gkhouston Jun 2012 #43
I haven't read one case on DU of someone saying every election we lose is because of fraud. Prometheus Bound Jun 2012 #50
Ding! Ding! L. Coyote Jun 2012 #68
Oh c'mon ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #104
OK, that's one election. The OP said EVERY election. Prometheus Bound Jun 2012 #107
I think you're smart enough to understand hyperbole ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #137
I guess I would classify it as a strawman rather than hyperbole. Prometheus Bound Jun 2012 #139
There was all kind of discussion of NY when they were trying to get rid of the lever machines. EFerrari Jun 2012 #116
So let's give the Republicans the benefit of the doubt.... meanit Jun 2012 #58
The problem is that we know it's possible 2pooped2pop Jun 2012 #59
I've seen that talking point alot today - TBF Jun 2012 #61
and you know that how? robinlynne Jun 2012 #62
So you are claiming EVERY election we lose is fraud? Really? Logical Jun 2012 #73
I can state that there has been fraud in every election since 2000. That I know. robinlynne Jun 2012 #76
Republicans can never win an election without stretching the truth. Jamaal510 Jun 2012 #63
Of course not but since elections are not transparent and worse the opposition owns TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #66
Post removed Post removed Jun 2012 #74
but that does NOT mean that there is never fraud a2liberal Jun 2012 #75
I must be really dumb lunatica Jun 2012 #80
We lost in WI because 70% of the voters oppose recalls either everytime WI_DEM Jun 2012 #87
I think alien abductions are a more pressing threat Capt. Obvious Jun 2012 #94
Then you didn't follow FL in 2000 or Ohio in 2004 or San Diego in 2006 EFerrari Jun 2012 #99
New Hampshire would have been an excellent test case. HubertHeaver Jun 2012 #120
Look, lets just face reality ..... oldhippie Jun 2012 #101
Too many on DU are like NBA fans ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #103
LOL. I remember arguing about this with my friends over 20 years ago RZM Jun 2012 #111
And yet the Election Reform forum doesn't shut down regardless of who wins. EFerrari Jun 2012 #117
We won in 2006 and 2008 ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #136
Actually, in 2006, Landshark was involved in a high profile litigation EFerrari Jun 2012 #140
Also, "Landslide Denied" was posted in Election Reform at the time eridani Jun 2012 #149
I am sure that many of the people claiming this is fraud because . . . well it just is 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #106
It just amazes me that SGMRTDARMY Jun 2012 #110
Ding ding ding... 414 Jun 2012 #123
You're wrong. shcrane71 Jun 2012 #115
It goes hand-in-hand. shcrane71 Jun 2012 #114
It has nothing to do with BIG money... meaculpa2011 Jun 2012 #125
I guess you meant to say "Not every election we lose is because of fraud!" Bonobo Jun 2012 #128
YES IT IS!!! crazyjoe Jun 2012 #142
ONE is too many. Zoeisright Jun 2012 #143
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Every election we lose is...»Reply #147