re: Half Of Detroit's Votes May Not Be Recounted

quote:

---

This isn't good news. You're telling me if a republican asks for a recount the rolls in the sleaziest districts are unassailable?

---

Pretty sure no republican has ever been dumb enough to care about Wayne county elections. Probably worse than Cook County.

quote:

---

My wife tells me that federal law, which she understands more than me, would trump state law on a constitutional issue if someone filed a federal suit. Not sure though I am not a lawyer.

---

I don't think federal law requires the tabulation and inclusion of fraudulent votes.

quote:

---

How is it 2016 and there are places in the United States that still use paper ballots

---

When I voted in the Boston area in 2008, we got a paper ballot and a sharpie to mark our ballots. We still use paper in L.A. with the ink punch thing.

quote:

---

retty sure no republican has ever been dumb enough to care about Wayne county elections. Probably worse than Cook County

---

If a race was close enough to require a legitimate recount, one of the dems strongholds and shenanigan factories is off limits for review.

That's a problem.

quote:

---

And there's little doubt in my mind if an audited recount was done in California, that thousands of illegal votes for Clinton would be discovere

---

Would be happy to see that happen. Would put to rest the defense of illegals voting.....or not

One thing I haven't seen mentioned - these type votes can frick up local elections moreso than a presidential election. Many congressional seats would also be adversely affected by these illegal votes. That could make a difference in state congresses.

quote:

---

If state law prohibits the recount of a precinct where the actual forms don't match the number of actual votes tabulated by the machines, then if there were a massive amount of voter fraud, and a recount were legitimately warranted (not like this BS that Stein has initiated) then how could a candidate fight this law?

---

Exactly. Doesn't the fact that the forms don't match the actual votes tabulated by the machines seem to prove, or at the very least hint at, something amiss with the vote tabulation? This should be the one instance where votes should be recounted, yet state law prohibits it? That makes no sense what so ever.

quote:

---

In other words, "if you put it in three or four times, it'll count for three or four votes, unless the poll worker decides to adjust the machine, which.... they ain't doing."

---

Yeah... that's not ripe for corruption.

My solution:

- issue every eligible voter a voting tag; a piece of paper or a stiff paper-card about the size of a credit card (this can/should be done ahead of time to assure that everyone that wishes to vote is indeed qualified... I'd rather spend weeks/months before an election getting that straight than have a metric frick ton of questionable ballots on election day)

- have the voting machine set up so that you must insert an unmarked tag for it to allow you to vote and it will check the tag barcode to see if it is legit... the machine nor anyone checking the numbers would know who is actually doing the voting; the machine just checks to see it someone/anyone who is about to vote is permitted (if you lose your tag then tough shite... if you're not responsible enough to keep track of a piece of paper then I don't want you voting anyway. However, if you lose it before election day then I could see a system in place for the voting machine's "cloud" to not permit the old tag to cast a vote and issue you a new one that would work.)

- when you've cast your vote the machine assigns you a number, prints that number on the paper tag, and returns the tag to you; this number is NOT connected to you, it is paired with the vote cast, and the number is in no way representative of the ballot

- within an hour or two of the polls closing have a website available for you to type the number the machine printed on your tag and display the votes you cast (it would be each citizen's responsibility to safeguard and/or destroy that tag at their discretion. It is the only thing that connects your voting registration to your vote.)

Everyone knows before election day whether or not they're allowed to vote.
Everyone knows before election day where they are supposed to vote.
No need for provisional ballots. Get rid of them.
No need for a recount as long as the checksum of assigned numbers matches the checksum of the results.

Michigan state election committee is set to pass a retroactive rule tommorrow that will require any candidate with 5% or less of the vote to cover 100% of the cost of any recount they request instead of the 125.00 per precinct. This will apply to the new recount which estimated to cost several million dollars.

quote:

---

My wife tells me that federal law, which she understands more than me, would trump state law on a constitutional issue if someone filed a federal suit. Not sure though I am not a lawyer.

---

She would be incorrect unless the plaintiff can prove discrimination. Even then, the scope would be limited to that one vote. If you could prove wide spread decrimination, recourse defaults to state law which you would then have to challenge in USSC and argue that recourse fails to satisfy Constitutional protections. There is no way in hell they are going to prove systemic discrimination.