Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Republicans Cooperating in Democratic Voter Fraud
My wife worked for the Illinois GOP investigating fraud from January to March 2006. She quit because the Republicans were not serious about it. Just before she left, there was the March primary. She came up with a list of precincts to visit on primary day based on unusually high participation rates, which was approved by her boss. Then he reversed course and told her, “X doesn’t want you there.” X was a Democratic Illinois House leader.
She asked why a Democrat was allowed to decide where a Republican was allowed to visit on primary day. She was told that a senior person in the Chicago GOP said, “We have an agreement.” One assumes that the Democrats were paying off Republican leaders to look the other way on voter fraud. It wouldn’t surprise me if similar agreements are in place in heavily Democratic cities such as Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
Too many Republicans act as if the Democrats will abide by Marquess of Queensberry Rules.
Published in Elections
Proven fund raising issues are too precious to waste by solving them.
Well I don’t deny that it’s less work, but they might actually get more money if they solved problems over time.
I am convinced that the GOPe believe that the only real problem is that the wrong party is in office.
But don’t they actually fundraise better when they’re NOT in office?
I don’t have any trustworthy data on that. My guess is that it’s a tossup. When they are in the minority, they warn of all the bad things the Dems are about to do and how they need money to stop them. When they are in the majority, they talk about how close they are to having real power and how they need money to get that last bit done.
I guess. But not being in power seems like less work, so if it’s about the same money then the costs are less which means more “profit margin.”
And less blame for things not going well.
There is nothing about that fat lady that in any way resembles anything about me.
Stacey Abrams said that Brian Kemp had a conflict of interest as Secretary of State when he ran for Governor in 2018, a claim dusted off by our irrepressible Kari Lake in Arizona, given that Democrat Katie Hobbs was Secretary of State as she was running for Governor.
However, elections are conducted on the county level and as I have already demonstrated, four of the five counties with the most voters are controlled by Republicans in Maricopa, Pinal, Yavapai and Mohave Counties.
For the addle-pates who believe in “clean elections”:
Looks as though one can’t even comment on them.
I never understand how twitters work. I have no idea what is being claimed in this screen shot.
I don’t have an account and don’t use twitter, so I’m not 100% sure, but the claim is that she can’t “retweet” the original posts.
I suppose the point of doing a retweet is to get more attention for the original post because the one retweeting has a different set of followers. It is a good question about why this capability would be disabled.
Of course there is fraud, and the bigger the state the greater the fraud. It’s part of the process and unavoidable. It is also the reason that the bottom up US system easily became the richest country that ever existed. There’s fraud in local elections and bottom up as well, but with thousands of jurisdictions and smaller governments it averages out and gives the best results. As we increasingly move power to the center, the fraud will get worse no matter who’s in charge. If we’re allowed to win the next election we’ll have to fix it and if we don’t it’s over.
It seems that top-down fraud is much worse, as is top-down economic control etc.
Of course it concentrates, narrows, gathers power and rots. Bottom up just fight it out, change and learn and rot tends to dissolve and be replaced by new less connected fraud. The returns don’t grow unless folks manage to increase the relative size of jurisdictions, but generally most folks have better things to do.