Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!
  1. Hi there... Can you please quickly check to make sure your email address is up to date here? Just in case we need to reach out to you or you lose your password. Muchero thanks!

Dem Senators introduce a bill to eliminate the Electoral College

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by g8orbill, Dec 17, 2024.

  1. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    12,217
    1,159
    1,618
    Apr 9, 2007
    Webster's defines it as: something that furnishes proof

    The evidence of no widespread voter fraud comes from the recounts, audits, and research done on multiple, recent elections. Dating back to 2000, all this evidence has shown the average number of fraudulent votes per election falls somewhere between 1 in 50,000 and 1 in 100,000 votes. To put this in perspective, there were about 154,000,000 votes for POTUS this past election. Total fraud votes, across the entire country, would be expected to fall between about 1,550 and 3,100 total.

    Under the current system, you could double the number of expected fraud votes and still not have enough fraud to overturn a single state. Using popular vote, you would need about 900X the expected fraud votes to possibly change the election outcome; and this assumes 100% of the fraud votes would all be for the losing candidate, and not split between the winner and loser.

    If you want to keep ignoring the evidence of no widespread fraud that has already been linked and posted, that's on you. For everyone else, plenty of links up thread showing that based on recounts, audits, and research showing fraud just isn't a problem with our elections.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. gator95

    gator95 GC Hall of Fame

    7,865
    863
    2,113
    Apr 3, 2007
    See, since we won't check for fraud, there isn't fraud to be found. Brilliant. Can't fix stupid...
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    12,217
    1,159
    1,618
    Apr 9, 2007
    So recounts, audits, and academic research on past elections that include searching for fraud isn't checking for fraud because?????
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. gator95

    gator95 GC Hall of Fame

    7,865
    863
    2,113
    Apr 3, 2007
    lol. Just laugh at them. It's all you can do when you people are this ignorant.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    12,217
    1,159
    1,618
    Apr 9, 2007
    I do laugh at your ignorance. I asked a simple question. Why does all the evidence of a minute amount of fraud uncovered by recounts, audits, and election research not count as evidence of no widespread fraud?

    If you can't answer this question, which one of us should be laughing at the other's ignorance?
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. dangolegators

    dangolegators GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 26, 2007
    No amount of facts or common sense is going to matter here.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. gator95

    gator95 GC Hall of Fame

    7,865
    863
    2,113
    Apr 3, 2007
    LOL. Thanks for the laughs. Coming from you means even more laughter. Still butthurt about losing the election I see...
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    21,447
    1,787
    1,763
    Apr 8, 2007
    Said it before the EC is an anachronism that should be eliminated. It never operated as intended and completely distorts the electoral process. That being said it will never be eliminated as long as smaller states believes that it provides them with disproportionate influence. By the way there is a scenario under which a candidate can lose the popular vote and win an EC majority by winning the larger states. It could happen if the margins in the larger states are very close while the margins in the smaller states are much larger.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1