- Joined
- May 11, 2014
- Messages
- 18,420
- Reaction score
- 38,685
8 months of hiding, crazy
Elections GA already did two audits!!! RHEEEEE
- Thread starter cottagecheesefan
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2017
- Messages
- 1,952
- Reaction score
- 1,189
Why is that?
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2009
- Messages
- 50,723
- Reaction score
- 35,563
Please be sure to tag me Monday when this prediction comes to pass. And if they have damning evidence what are they waiting for?
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2015
- Messages
- 13,072
- Reaction score
- 10,730
If that's what it is then that's what it is.
The security of our elections is more important than whose side you're on.
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 64,293
- Reaction score
- 30,004
How about the integrity of the elections?
How about using the myth of election fraud to suppress the black vote?
Isn't that issue also more important than whose side you're on?
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2015
- Messages
- 13,072
- Reaction score
- 10,730
How exactly are they suppressing the black vote?
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 64,293
- Reaction score
- 30,004
This has been asked and answered many times in recent weeks.
Start with the false premise that there is voter fraud. No significant amount has been proven, ever, but don't let that stop you.
Craft election security measures that specifically target opposition votes to provide additional hurdles, obstacles, delays. They can appear minor, it's the cumulative effect you're looking for.
Start with identification, ignore the fact no evidence exists it will prevent any fraud or that any fraud even exists. It is known the black community has a lower percentage of people with appropriate ID so this is an ideal target.
Reduce the number of voting stations in black districts.
Reduce the available hours of voting stations, requiring black voters to get time off from work to vote, which is often not possible.
Reduce the hours you can vote on weekends, specifically targeting Sunday, which traditionally is a big day for black voting due to church initiatives.
This year has seen an avalanche of voting laws, most of which would never have been allowed when the Voting Act of 1965 was in full effect as they're so blatantly suppression. It was decided that we had passed the time the act was needed so it was gutted, and here we are. This is why people are saying Jim Crow 2.0.
I managed a pretty high level fraud department for a decade, protecting twenty million dollars a week in transactions. Fraud control is a faucet that controls not only fraud but also legitimate transactions. It's possible to create a completely impenetrable system that is impossible to defraud but the tighter your controls, the more legitimate transactions are prevented. The fraud prevention rules you put in place can specifically target the legitimate transactions that are being blocked, and that's what's happening here.
I ran a weekly meeting for the department heads. I had to present data to illustrate our fraud levels, where we believed the fraud was coming from, what measures we were implementing to prevent that fraud, and the amount of legitimate transactions we expected would be blocked. I would also have to justify previous measures and their success rate. If legislators had to present a fraction of the evidence required of me, none of these laws would pass, because they have been unable to provide any evidence of fraud at all.
More security isn't always better, there is always a cost. Bad actors have weaponized this cost for more than a century and created institutionalized voter fraud. It used to painfully obvious to everyone, like jars of jelly beans for black voters, but it's more insidious now, and they get away with saying it's about election security when anyone that understands fraud know that isn't what it's about. The most respected election security expert in America, a Republican, said as much and was fired for his troubles.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2008
- Messages
- 24,148
- Reaction score
- 26,381
Assuming you're asking me seriously, I haven't seen enough to believe that there was fraud large enough to swing the election to Biden. However, that doesn't mean I'm not disturbed by some of the information that's come out. You may not like that @cottagecheesefan is staying on top of this, but some of the things he is posting about are very concerning and should be looked into.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2007
- Messages
- 30,101
- Reaction score
- 5,365
Do you dream of having sex with me too? Sorry, I dont swing that way.
I've never doubted Biden won you "moran". I stated that I was surprised it was as close as it was. So if you're going to keep throwing my name out there at least get your facts straight.
BTW, You really need to see someone about your infatuation with me - it really isnt healthy.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2017
- Messages
- 1,952
- Reaction score
- 1,189
- Joined
- May 12, 2015
- Messages
- 14,116
- Reaction score
- 4,321
Bunch of slack jawed retards still going on about a stolen election?
He lost, get over it. You're being conned with wild conspiracies about organized fraud. You're using ridiculous unsubstantiated allegations and incredibly sloppy statistics to justify your nonsense.
He lost, get over it. You're being conned with wild conspiracies about organized fraud. You're using ridiculous unsubstantiated allegations and incredibly sloppy statistics to justify your nonsense.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2015
- Messages
- 13,072
- Reaction score
- 10,730
I can't even take you seriously when you say that showing identification is somehow a racist move to keep black people from voting. Is it racist against black people to card them for alcohol or cigarettes? Are hotels racist? What about pawn shops? Credit card companies? How come you guys conveniently leave out all the other instances that require an ID, yet it's this one, which is one of the most important ones, that is all the sudden racist. Your argument doesn't fly there.
Laws in many states were modified due to the pandemic to make voting easier and safer for most people. Most of these things you say are targeting black people are just laws that are reverting back to how they were pre pandemic. It's a ploy to trick people into thinking that conservatives are targeting black people when they in fact are not.
I don't personally think there is enough voting fraud to sway most elections but you'd be a fool to think that some level of fraud is not going on. In order to find voter fraud, you need to investigate for voter fraud. It doesn't just knock on your door and ask to be looked at. Don't you find it kind of weird that many liberals are saying there is no evidence of voter fraud while shitting on people for investigating voter fraud? If you believe there is no such thing as voter fraud, then you should welcome the investigation so you can be proven correct.
In the end it's probably going to be a waste of money to investigate it but it's the cost of doing business sometimes. I don't really care about when and where people can vote as long as it's secure but voting without having to prove you are an American citizen is not racist in any way, shape or form. It's a ridiculous notion to think that we should just go on the honor system when it comes to letting people vote in this country.
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 64,293
- Reaction score
- 30,004
This isn't a debate and I don't need you to take me seriously.
It's a fact no significant fraud has been presented, let alone fraud that would be prevented by identification. It's also a fact that the black community happens to have less ID. If there isn't fraud why increase security? And why vote against Democrat fraud bills only to insist these ones are necessary? And why implement this in concert with all those other changes to voting that clearly have the greatest effect on the black vote?
There are a lot of frivolous claims of racism but this isn't one of them.
I'm all for election security but this isn't that. Republicans across the country were saying these elections were secure until Trump went nuclear and started campaigning against anyone that said so. Several refused to lie and stuck to their guns, and lost positions and employment as a result, everything about this screams lies and corruption, and it's clever, masquerading election tampering as election security.
I know there's nothing I can say or show you that will convince you, but everything I'm saying is true. They haven't presented significant fraud that can be prevented with identification, they refused to support Democrat election security bills, and every single change they're putting in place hurts the black vote.
You can believe otherwise, but if you're going to say it, you should prove it. 2020 had a record turnout for voters, the Republicans were crushed, and their response is to suppress the black vote.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2002
- Messages
- 36,307
- Reaction score
- 41,250
The most liberal, black senator is in fact, a racist according to the left. Lmao
So is Stacey Abrams
So is Stacey Abrams
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 64,293
- Reaction score
- 30,004
Warnock slams GOP-controlled Georgia Legislature for bill that would restrict voter access
(CNN)Georgia US Sen. Raphael Warnock, in his first Sunday show interview since being elected to Congress in January, slammed the Republican-controlled Georgia Legislature for a massive voting bill that would restrict voter access.
"I think it's unfortunate that some politicians have looked at the results and, rather than changing their message, they're busy trying to change the rules," the Democrat said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
(CNN)Georgia US Sen. Raphael Warnock, in his first Sunday show interview since being elected to Congress in January, slammed the Republican-controlled Georgia Legislature for a massive voting bill that would restrict voter access.
"I think it's unfortunate that some politicians have looked at the results and, rather than changing their message, they're busy trying to change the rules," the Democrat said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Raphael Warnock says he ‘never opposed’ voter ID laws but once called them ‘discriminatory’
“More than a decade ago, Republican legislators in the state of Georgia, ironically the home state of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., led the way in turning the clock back on voting rights by passing unnecessary and discriminatory voter ID laws,” wrote Mr. Warnock, a Democrat. “As shocking as it is, this is just the latest chapter in an old story and, of late, a growing trend in America. Regardless of political party, we should all see it for what it is - an assault on the soul of our democracy, the sacred trust we have with one another as an American people.”
Just three months, Mr. Warnock criticized a new Georgia law that requires people to provide some proof of identity — whether a drivers’ license or state ID
number, the last four digits of their Social Security number or a utility bill — when requesting an absentee ballot.
“What the state Legislature did yesterday is to try to arrest the voices and the votes of the people,” he said.
Mr. Warnock, a pastor at Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church that was once Martin Juther King Jr.’s home base, last year narrowly won a special election for Senate and now faces voters again in 2022 seeking a full term.
He expressed support for voter ID in the TV interview just as the Senate prepares to vote Tuesday on the voting rights bill that Democrats have made a cornerstone of their agenda and a top issue in the 2022 elections.
The bill would, among other things, weaken voter ID requirements in many states by mandating states instead accept a sworn statement testifying to a voters’ identity.
A spokeswoman for Mr. Warnock did not respond when asked to reconcile his statement in favor of voter ID with his support for the bill and his past statements.
His comments drew immediate criticism from the right.
“It’s a lie,” said Hans von Spakovsky, manager of an election law initiative at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank.
The National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee called his comments an “all-star flip-flop.”
“More than a decade ago, Republican legislators in the state of Georgia, ironically the home state of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., led the way in turning the clock back on voting rights by passing unnecessary and discriminatory voter ID laws,” wrote Mr. Warnock, a Democrat. “As shocking as it is, this is just the latest chapter in an old story and, of late, a growing trend in America. Regardless of political party, we should all see it for what it is - an assault on the soul of our democracy, the sacred trust we have with one another as an American people.”
Just three months, Mr. Warnock criticized a new Georgia law that requires people to provide some proof of identity — whether a drivers’ license or state ID
number, the last four digits of their Social Security number or a utility bill — when requesting an absentee ballot.
“What the state Legislature did yesterday is to try to arrest the voices and the votes of the people,” he said.
Mr. Warnock, a pastor at Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church that was once Martin Juther King Jr.’s home base, last year narrowly won a special election for Senate and now faces voters again in 2022 seeking a full term.
He expressed support for voter ID in the TV interview just as the Senate prepares to vote Tuesday on the voting rights bill that Democrats have made a cornerstone of their agenda and a top issue in the 2022 elections.
The bill would, among other things, weaken voter ID requirements in many states by mandating states instead accept a sworn statement testifying to a voters’ identity.
A spokeswoman for Mr. Warnock did not respond when asked to reconcile his statement in favor of voter ID with his support for the bill and his past statements.
His comments drew immediate criticism from the right.
“It’s a lie,” said Hans von Spakovsky, manager of an election law initiative at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank.
The National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee called his comments an “all-star flip-flop.”
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 64,293
- Reaction score
- 30,004
As for Abrams:
Pressed on the voter ID provision, Abrams said that “no one has ever objected to having to prove who you are to vote.”
She argued that restrictive voter ID bills — like bills that bar voters from using student ID cards but allow gun licenses — are the bills she opposes.
She argued that restrictive voter ID bills — like bills that bar voters from using student ID cards but allow gun licenses — are the bills she opposes.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2007
- Messages
- 14,780
- Reaction score
- 13,903
It's 2021. ID's are not a factor in any form of voter suppression. The only people unable to obtain ID are criminals or illegal immigrants. You need an ID for most things in the world that allow you to get above the poverty line. I live In Australia were voting is compulsory at all levels, you still need ID to vote... You get fined if you don't go in.
I can tell you right now that I trust our elections more than anything I have seen or heard about in the US.
If rural white people can travel 3-6 hours into the local town to vote, I think a few suburban voters can take a 30 min bus ride to the local polling area. Alternatively people can register for a postal vote, travel in on a day that suits them to verify that ID and vote on the day that suits them.
Those are not onerous conditions to impose on someone who wants to have a say on who is running the country.
You said you worked in Fraud protecting 20 million dollars of transactions weekly.
Did you use transaction IDs to identify the payments coming in and out? Or did you just take it at face value when a request to send 5 million dollars from account A to account B via Western Union was made?
You couldn't have caught these transactions without some sort of way to identify them. At the moment the US voting system is the Wild West.
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 64,293
- Reaction score
- 30,004
You're sadly mistaken if you think there aren't ways to validate votes without identification, or that it's the wild wild west. I saw an extended interview with Christopher Krebs who went into great detail about just how difficult if not impossible it would be to commit significant voter fraud, which is why none has ever been found. Ever.
Your transaction ID question is complicated. We didn't require any ID at all when someone was creating an account but had other verification methods. We were a transaction processor and of course there were transaction identifiers, but I don't think that's what you were asking. Our funds could only be deposited by checking accounts, and no withdrawals were allowed until a minimum of the withdrawal value in deposits had cleared. No ID required, the security of their own account login was their responsibility. If a client won big (we were in the gaming industry) and wanted a wire transfer immediately, they would request it from the merchant because we wouldn't do it under any circumstances. The merchants had their own fraud departments and would process those requests on a case by case basis.
There have been many threads on Sherdog where gamblers have complained about the withdrawal process, accusing the merchants of scamming them because of the delay. Truth is, speed of withdrawal from a merchant is usually dependent on history with that merchant, there are whales who spend millions a month and what they want, they get.
My company only required ID when an account was caught by our fraud algorithms, and the ID rarely made a difference, it's too easy to fake. We asked for it so we'd have it on file in case the client tried to claim we weren't real and claw back the deposits with a bank.
There was a guy who took us for a few million over a five years. I say it was one guy but it was probably a team, and they knew how everything worked at every merchant, bank and transaction processor. I mentioned in a previous post that fraud prevention is like a faucet, but the more impervious you make your system the more legitimate transactions get stopped, which kills business. A pro is going to get away with it, it my my job to slow the bleeding. I had a team of SAS analysts sifting the data every day to find patterns of fraud, and I'd tailor the algorithm to catch the new patterns. There were no big scores, those were easy to stop, but they'd chip away every day and it adds up.
Anyways, it's hard to get people to come out and vote, that's the point of adding inconveniences to keep people away, and targeting specific communities is a tried and true method. I'd bet the percentage of rural white Americans traveling hours to vote is statistically insignificant, and you shouldn't have to earn your vote by jumping through hoops. There was an article that listed average wait times and black communities were waiting five to ten times as long to cast their vote, that was the genesis of all the "don't give water to people waiting to vote" talks.
It's 2021. Voting should be easy, and don't cry fraud unless you can prove it exists.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2002
- Messages
- 36,307
- Reaction score
- 41,250
So he calls them discriminatory, but does not oppose them? Doesn't that mean he is not opposed to discrimination, meaning he is in fact racist? Lol, derp
