Site icon Common Sense and Ramblings In America

Voter Fraud In 2020, How Will It Affect Future Elections?

I have written several postings related to Various topics including the military, Voting, the economy, religion and etc in America. A list of links have been provided at bottom of this article for your convenience. This article will, however address additional issues in these topics.

Everybody on the right was stunned by the results of the November 3rd election. People have been watching Trump rallies and boat and car parades numbering in the thousands. While Biden was barely able to get crowds in the double digits. So how, while Trump had more votes than Obama in this election, Biden still managed to beat him? The obvious answer is voter fraud. We also saw the unequal calling of states in the election. They always managed to make sure that Biden had a comfortable electoral lead before they gave a win to Trump. They still have not given Alaska to Trump. Do they think this was a moral victory. They also gave a win to Virginia after several hours, despite that Trump had more votes. Biden did eventually win the state, but that is not the point, there was no uniformity in how they calledc those states. Biden could be ahead by one percentage point and they called it, while Trump had a 10 point lead, and they refused to call the state. I once thought that Fox was for Trump, but they were the worst culprit, even more unfair than CNN.

What is the key to successful cheating, make it so pervasive that anyone trying to blow the whistle is looked upon as a conspiracy theory lunatic. Because not everybody can be cheating. The answer is, yes they can, if you have enough money to buy people. Obviously the Left has the money to do this.

While doing research for this article I came across an article by the BBC trying to dispel 5 viral voter fraud claims. My first question is, why is the BBC getting involved in our business? Besides their election process is totally different than ours, so why do we really care what they think (I have included some information on their election process in the addendum section below). Just a little side note several countries have congratulated Biden on his win, guess which country did not, Russia, they said that they will wait until the results are official. While many of our supposed allies did congratulate Biden, like Canada, Ireland, South Korea, Australia, Germany, England, Hungary, Israel and Palestine. Many of these countries are surprisingly not paying their fair share in NATO. I guess they don’t want to pay their bills.

I will cover these 5 supposedly dispelled voter frauds.

As President Trump continues to dispute the result of the US election, false or misleading posts have been spreading on social media about the vote.

Some have been amplified by President Trump and his team, who have called into question the integrity of the election without providing evidence.

Dead people can’t vote: Michigan rumour debunked

Viral tweets alleged that dead people were casting votes in the key state of Michigan, adding to a Trump-led chorus of unproven “voter fraud” claims.

Michigan authorities have hit back, calling the rumors “misinformation” – and noting that votes from dead people are rejected. The viral tweets supposedly identified people who had cast an absentee ballot despite being born at the turn of the century and having passed away.

One of the men in the posts seems to have been mixed up with his father, now deceased. The men had the same name and address, according to the Politifact website. Local officials in Michigan told the site that the son’s ballot was erroneously attributed to the father on the official voting system.

We’ve seen other isolated cases of allegations of “dead people” voting – most also explained by family members with the same name, or technical hitches, such as voters being instructed to enter a dummy date of birth if they can’t initially find their voter registration record online. The rumors have been repeated by influential accounts, including those of the president’s son Don Jr – who of course also shares a name with his father – and Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage.

No evidence for computer software glitch in Michigan

Posts are being widely shared online suggesting a glitch in the vote counting software used in Michigan led to thousands of ballots cast for Donald Trump being counted for Joe Biden. The claims have made their way onto the president’s Twitter – retweeting Republican Senator Ted Cruz suggesting there could be a problem with the software used across the state.

There was a problem in one county where votes were initially incorrectly reported for Mr Biden, which Michigan’s Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said “was quickly identified and corrected”. She added the initial mistake was a human error, not a software error. Viral posts currently circulating claim there could be the same issue in 47 other counties in Michigan where the same software is used. Mrs Benson said: “There is no evidence this user error occurred elsewhere in the state.”

‘Sharpie’ votes still count in Arizona

Another widespread rumour emerged during the count in the battleground state of Arizona. Tweets alleged there was a scheme to discount votes in pro-Republican parts of the state by distributing Sharpie pens – permanent markers – for people to fill in their ballots. In one widely circulated video, a woman describes how voting machines supposedly can’t read ballots marked with this type of pen. The person behind the camera says votes aren’t being counted and that people are being forced to use Sharpie pens to skew the vote total. This led to a surge of activity on social media, claims of voter fraud and that large numbers of votes from Trump supporters were being invalidated.

CNN reported that a group of protesters that gathered in Maricopa County in Arizona were “shouting about the sharpie social media misinformation.”

But the claims are false.

Maricopa County officials said Sharpies do not invalidate ballots. The Arizona secretary of state, Katie Hobbs, confirmed on Twitter that if you voted in person “your ballot will be counted, no matter what kind of pen you used (even a Sharpie)!”.

Ms Hobbs later told CNN “even if the machines can’t read them for some reason, a marker bled through to the other side, we have ways to count them. They’re going to be counted. There is absolutely no merit to saying that this was some conspiracy to invalidate Republican ballots.”

Erroneous Michigan vote map

A map of voting in Michigan from the election night – which shows a sudden increase of around 130,000 votes for Joe Biden, but none for Mr Trump – has gone viral on social media. President Trump has tweeted the image, which is raising speculation about voter fraud.

It’s commonplace that state authorities will add a big chunk of votes to a tally at once. But social media users were questioning why Mr Trump didn’t have any votes added to his tally in this particular update.

The explanation is simple – it was a data entry error that was later corrected.

Decision Desk, the election monitoring website which created the map, said: “It was a simple error from a file created by the state that we ingested… the state noticed the error and produced an updated count.”

The spokesperson added: “This sort of thing can happen on election night and we expect other vote tabulators in Michigan experienced this error and corrected in real-time like we did.” Twitter has added labels to the tweets that raised suspicions, saying: “Some or all of the content shared in this tweet is disputed and might be misleading about an election or other civic process.” Matt Mackowiak, the user whose post was picked up by Mr Trump, has deleted the tweet and apologized – although the image remains widely shared elsewhere.

In the early hours of Wednesday, the map was propelled by supporters of the pro-Trump conspiracy theory QAnon and to a wider audience by conservative influencers online. When we contacted Michigan’s Bureau of Elections, they said they didn’t have a comment on the data discrepancy, but said the results were at this stage “unofficial” and not the final count.

Wisconsin did not have more ballots than registered voters

There have been widespread false claims that more people in Wisconsin voted than were registered. A user tweeted: “BREAKING: Wisconsin has more votes than people who are registered to vote. Total number of registered voters: 3,129,000. Total number of votes cast: 3,239,920. This is direct evidence of fraud.”

However, this number of registered voters is outdated – the latest figure as of 1 November is 3,684,726. That tweet has now been deleted, but people on Facebook and Twitter continue to share a screenshot of the post. Voter turnout for Wisconsin is significantly higher at this election than in previous years. The state also allows people to register to vote on election day itself, which means the overall number of registered voters could be even higher than the current reported figure.

On the matter of vote fraud, there is law and there are facts. We’ll hear plenty about fraud, but we’ll have to remind ourselves to ask: Did it make a difference? Even if the Trump campaign has potential claims in law, they would collapse if, as a matter of fact, they would not affect the outcome of the race. Pennsylvania is a good example.

As repeatedly recounted, the state supreme court, by fiat, ordered a the three-day extension of the November 3 Election Day deadline for the state’s receipt of mail-in votes — i.e., until close-of-business November 6. I believe this was an unconstitutional usurpation of the state legislature’s power to set the rules for elections. If so, that would give the Trump campaign a basis to seek the Supreme Court’s intervention. Indeed, four justices on the high court were poised to grant a stay against the state court’s order in mid-October; and just last week, three of those justices induced Pennsylvania to agree to segregate the ballots received during the three-day extension, anticipating that the Court might review the matter on an expedited basis after Election Day.

In addition, the Trump campaign could also argue that there was a significant potential for vote fraud because of the presumption the Pennsylvania court imposed on its extension order: Ballots are to be deemed timely submitted even if they lack a legible postmark — or any postmark at all — proving they were mailed on or before November 3. Obviously, this creates the possibility that ballots could be harvested and submitted post-election without postmarks — theoretically, in large enough quantities to change the result that would have been obtained if only the ballots truly submitted by November 3 were tallied.

So we have a viable legal claim and a potential for fraud in a battleground state that, it was reasonably anticipated, could decide the election. Clearly, that was why a number of Supreme Court justices were inclined to intervene, even though the Court would understandably prefer not to be entangled in electoral politics, as it controversially was in the 2000 Bush-Gore contest.

All of this only matters if there are enough late-arriving ballots to change the result.

Bill Hemmer interviewed an election official from Luzerne County, northeastern Pennsylvania’s most populous county with over 320,000 people. He explained that, for all the legal huffing and puffing over illegality and fraud, only about 200 ballots arrived by mail there on Wednesday. Obviously, each day we get further from November 3, we should expect fewer ballots, to the point where it is down to a trickle on Friday. Now, there are 67 counties in Pennsylvania. But if that is the late-arrival rate in Luzerne, most counties are going to have fewer — many will have significantly fewer. As I write this post at 6 p.m. Wednesday evening, Pennsylvania is reporting that 87 percent of the statewide vote is in, and President Trump leads by 4.8 percent, which translates to over 292,000 votes.

Now, it is certainly possible that the remaining 13 percent of the vote could break heavily for former vice president Joe Biden, and that he could eke out a razor-thin win, in which case every vote might count. If that happens, there could be a convincing legal claim.

It is at least equally likely, though, that either 1) Trump will hold on and win the state, or 2) the vote will break so sharply for Biden that he (Biden) wins by one or two points. In the first of those latter two scenarios, the likely illegality and potential fraud would be irrelevant. And even if Biden wins (the second of those scenarios), it only matters if so many Biden ballots arrived between November 4 and 6 that they could have been the difference-maker, shifting the contest from Trump to Biden.

If it turns out that we are talking only about a few thousand late-arriving votes, and either candidate has prevailed by thousands more than that, it’s much ado about nothing.

Elections are not like criminal cases. In a criminal prosecution, if the prosecutor alleges that the defendant committed a $1 million fraud but can only prove a $10,000 fraud, the defendant is still guilty of fraud and could face the significant consequences of a felony conviction. In an election, if one candidate alleges fraud and can prove some fraud but not enough to alter the result, there are no significant consequences as far as the election is concerned. (There could be serious consequences for any person found to have committed vote fraud, but that has no bearing on the outcome of the election.)

The point is that we must keep ourselves grounded in concrete fact in the coming days, as we listen to allegations that courts or bureaucrats lawlessly overrode the state legislatures’ power to set election rules, and of potential or actual fraud. Our first question should always be: “Even if everything you claim is true, would it have changed the outcome?” If the answer is no, that’s really the end of the matter, even if what a court did was illegal and even if there was some provable fraud.

After a tense election day, counting is continuing in the United States where wafer thin majorities could decide who becomes president.

Claims of voter fraud are coming in as fast as ballots can be counted, some of them stoked by US President Donald Trump.

Trouble is, the ones that have come to light just aren’t stacking up.

On election night, amid an inconclusive result, Mr Trump claimed voter fraud was happening or about to happen.

“Millions and millions of people voted for us today and a very sad group of people is trying to disenfranchise that group of people, and we won’t stand for it,” he said early on Wednesday morning US time.

“We will be going to the Supreme Court. We want all voting to stop. We don’t want them to find any ballots at 4am in the morning.”

Then, at around 4am, more than 100,000 votes did appear in Democrat Joe Biden’s column in the crucial swing state of Wisconsin pushing him ahead of his Republican rival. Some commentators called it a “ballot dump” designed to rob Mr Trump of victory.

However, state officials have hit back at the claims.

“We are not finding ballots,” Julietta Henry, director of elections for Milwaukee County, told website PolitiFact National.

“Ballots are being counted.”

Those votes were reported in a short period of time because the mail-in and absentee count for Milwaukee County and a slew of other communities took place in one location and the large volume of ballots were counted in bulk.

Green Bay, another large city, also counted its absentee ballots in one centre. So, just like Milwaukee, it also had a big drop of votes overnight.

But there’s been no evidence presented that those votes are anything but legitimate.

Similarly, a claim more Wisconsinites voted than there are actual registered voters in the state was debunked. In actual fact, around 400,000 residents didn’t bother to vote at all – or at least those votes have not yet been counted.

On Wednesday, Mr Trump’s lawyer and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said he would file a law suit and claimed there had been “anti-democratic” actions in Philadelphia and “all over the country”.

He said that election observers were not allowed close to the counting taking place and therefore they could miss “50,000 fraudulent ballots being dumped”.

He said the Philadelphia count was an “illegitimate count”.

A Philadelphia court has thrown out the challenge but team Trump are taking the case further.

Pennsylvania Attorney-General Josh Shapiro said in a CNN interview the lawsuit was “more a political document than a legal document”.

“There is transparency in this process. The counting has been going on. There are observers observing this counting, and the counting will continue,” he said.

There has also been wrangling about Philadelphia counting mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day, postmarked on the day or before, or have no postmark. Election officials have said those ballots, likely just a few hundred, will be counted but will be set aside pending any court cases.


There have been many voter fraud claims. But are any of them true? In a nutshell, no. While there have been mistakes made with mail-in ballots such as ballot papers being sent to the wrong addresses, experts agree widespread voter fraud is extremely rare.

The US-based Brennan Centre for Justice, a nonpartisan policy institute states despite extensive claims about it taking place, voter fraud is “very rare”.

“Voter impersonation is virtually non-existent, and many instances of alleged fraud are, in fact, mistakes by voters or administrators. The same is true for mail ballots, which are secure and essential to holding a safe election amid the coronavirus pandemic,” it said.

The centre cites a collection of studies from 2004 to 2017 that found voter fraud incredibly rare. One 2017 study found the overall rate at less than 0.0009 per cent across the country.

“The verdict is in from every corner that voter fraud is sufficiently rare that it simply could not and does not happen at the rate even approaching that which would be required to “rig” an election,” the centre notes.

“Electoral integrity is key to our democracy, and politicians who genuinely care about protecting our elections should focus not on phantom fraud concerns, but on those abuses that actually threaten election security,” it said.

We should not be surprised at what a mess this election has become, not only because of the uncompromising nature of our current politics, but also because of the warnings we received well beforehand. President Trump has been bringing up voter fraud long before Nov. 3, and the left had been weirdly insistent that he accept the results without double-checking the entire time.

Afterward, of course, the evidence for that fraud is rapidly piling up. There has been eyewitness testimony about falsifying the postmarks on late mail-in ballots. Election observers were being harassed and kept away from the counting tables in Detroit. Software glitches have been discovered switching votes from Trump to Joe Biden in Michigan, and the same software is being used in other battleground states.

There have been statistical anomalies like 90 percent voter turnout in Wisconsin and bizarre late-night vote spikes for Biden in several states. All of this evidence and more strongly suggest the Democrats and their media allies are indeed attempting to steal the election.

Despite this evidence of voter fraud, it’s not hard to find a gaggle of politicians and news organizations claiming that it doesn’t exist. So what are we to make of the many and varied claims that all of this publicly available evidence doesn’t actually exist?

Well, some of these denials are, no doubt, simply the work of liars—something of which there is no shortage in American public life today. People who deny reality when convenient simply need to be denounced as such rather than reasoned with.

Nevertheless, this is by no means always the case. We can persuade many Americans still if we understand what they are trying to say. Not everyone who declares or believes that there is no evidence is truly a liar. Rather, some might simply be mistaking a lack of proof for a lack of evidence.

The Difference Between Proof and Evidence

Sloppy thinkers—as most of us are these days—are prone to confuse the two, for they are related but not the same. Evidence is information that suggests a conclusion. Proof, on the other hand, is a collection of evidence that meets a sufficient standard. So while it’s absurd to say there’s no evidence of voter fraud, it’s not entirely unfair to say there’s not yet proof of voter fraud, depending on what standard we have in mind.

This misunderstanding causes a serious problem. Too many people are suggesting that a supposed lack of evidence should prevent any further investigation into the matter. A lack of proof, however, indicates no such conclusion. There are two key reasons that a lack of proof does not justify sweeping the matter under the rug the way much of the swamp is trying to do.

First of all, proof is the result of investigation, not its prerequisite. You don’t need proof before investigating a matter because proof is what you’re supposed to find (or not find) by its conclusion. In contrast, evidence alone is all you need to justify taking a closer look.

Most Americans are still old enough to remember the 2000 presidential election when Al Gore kept the matter in the courts until mid-December. We also remember some of the evidence that justified the investigation for so many.

There was the infamous “butterfly ballot” that might have confused voters and lead them to accidentally vote for Pat Buchanan. There was the whole matter of hanging chads and whether to count those as true votes. Evidence like this was deemed sufficient warrant for recounts, investigations, and legal proceedings at the time.

More Evidence This Year Than in 2000

In 2020, the body of evidence eclipses that of 2000. Today, the confusion arises from half a dozen states rather than one. The reported incidents indicate outright fraud more than they do simple incompetence, especially since they all just happen to benefit the same candidate. Shouldn’t this evidence give us even more reason to investigate the matter than we had two decades ago?

And if your memory doesn’t work that far back, you should at least remember 2016. A few Russian dollars spent on Facebook during the election and a highly questionable dossier were all it took to trigger FBI and congressional investigations into President Trump for years. There is far more evidence to justify an investigation into voter fraud in 2020.

But there is a second reason that evidence rather than proof is sufficient to warrant an investigation. If proof is a body of evidence that meets a certain standard, exactly which standard do we apply? This question has different answers in different contexts. In a court of law, the standard for proving a case is “preponderance of evidence” in civil cases and “beyond a reasonable doubt” in criminal cases. Scientific journals will have another standard while philosophers have still another. But exactly what standard of proof should American voters demand?

The left wants big media and big tech to be our de facto standard of proof. That’s certainly what The New York Times was proclaiming them to be on election day before they deleted their tweet.

The problem is that everyone already knows his own standards of proof operate on a sliding scale. Big media wasn’t terribly particular about their standards on Russian collusion, Brett Kavanaugh’s past, or even smirking teenagers. Neither was big tech very interested in regulating the spread of such dubious narratives.

Even now, the only thing about the election they want to investigate is whether they can blame Qanon for their faulty polls. Their business has become their politics, plain and simple. They’ve been carrying water for the left for far too long for any freethinker to consider them objective, fair, or even professional.

Americans Don’t Trust Big Media’s Claims Any More

America doesn’t play that game anymore. The Boomers’ world in which nothing was true until you heard it on the six o’clock news is now nostalgia. Today, we get our news from a wide assortment of selected individuals and organizations that we’ve individually come to trust based on our own experience.

But since experience is so subjective, everyone’s selections vary significantly. Accordingly, there’s no real unity to be found there either. As a result, while new media has proven fantastic at accumulating and promulgating evidence, they’re ill-suited to offering broad proof because they do not have any kind of common standard.

The upshot is this: TwitterCNNGoogle, and the like can project and declare whatever winner they want, but they don’t get to choose the president. That’s never going to serve as proof to most Americans today. Big media and big tech have been too exposed to get away with doing that anymore.

That is why this issue needs to go to the courts to be decided. They are some of the last remaining institutions to which all Americans can—in principle, at least—be held accountable.

If all the evidence of voter fraud is not investigated and properly accounted for, half of America will fervently believe that the election is a fraud no matter who ultimately wins. It is a critical problem if half of a democratic nation has insufficient trust in its electoral institutions to believe the presidential election was legitimate.

That goes beyond the usual matter of sore losing and undermines the whole enterprise. We are already asking each other: To what extent is this election’s fraud an outlier? Are we seeing so much evidence because it’s unusual or simply because we’re looking more closely this year?

Suspicion of Cheating Ends the Game

When one team believes the other is cheating and that the referees cannot be trusted to stop it, that only leaves two options. Either you cheat also to even the odds, or you take your ball and go home. Both options end the game. Giving up ends it quickly, but compounding the cheating will ultimately do the same. After all, “Calvinball” is only fun for about five minutes; it’s no way to run a nation.

The only way out of this mess is to publicly investigate voter fraud and carry that investigation to its proper conclusion—towards either clear proof or a clear inability to find proof. Either all the evidence of fraud will be accounted for in a way that proves most of it to be benign, or it will prove the guilt of those involved. If the latter, then a lot of people will need to go to prison before we can trust our referees again. All this will need to be done so publicly and satisfactorily that most Americans will believe the problem of voter fraud is fixed.

This cannot be accomplished by Facebook and Twitter shutting down the conversation. This cannot be accomplished by archaic media organizations that have squandered their public trust and esteem declaring a winner. It cannot even be accomplished by each individual’s preferred gaggle of new media sources, for America needs something that transcends individual preference.

Right now, trust in the democratic process can only be restored if President Trump continues to fight against the fraud in open court until it reaches its conclusion—whatever that conclusion ends up being. If he fails at that, then there’s not much reason to put stock in elections that many of us believe to be fake. In that scenario, America will eventually find other ways of governing herself.

False accusations of election fraud threaten to undermine Americans’ confidence in the democratic process in the long run, even if they recognize today that the allegations are spurious.

Misinformation has been used on many occasions throughout history to destabilize political systems, cause chaos and turn people against one another. In recent years, it has been used to foster uncertainty about, for example, whether President Barack Obama was born in the United States. Although the facts on the so-called birther conspiracy were known from the time Obama ran for president in 2008, more than half of Republicans still incorrectly believed in 2017 that he was not born in America.

One possible reason? Republican supporters of the conspiracy theory, including Trump himself for years before he became president, repeated the theory over and over.

And lies are especially dangerous when they’re repeated many times.

In a 2011 study, cognitive psychologists Linda Henkel of Fairfield University and Mark Mattson of Fordham University examined the effects of repeated falsehoods compared with facts.

They asked their study participants to absorb information from a reliable source and an unreliable source. The participants consistently dubbed statements that were read to them repeatedly to be true, even when they had been told beforehand that the assertions were false.

“Statements read multiple times were perceived as more valid” regardless of their actual validity, Henkel and Mattson wrote.

When people are already eager to believe something, the effect of misinformation that confirms their biases is even worse.

Elizabeth Loftus, a University of California, Irvine professor whose groundbreaking research on the “misinformation effect” has demonstrated the long-lasting nature of false memories, said the combination of misinformation and confirmation bias is especially dangerous.

“What fairly recent work shows is that we are far more likely to accept misinformation when it fits with our preexisting beliefs or biases,” she said. “When people get misinformation and it contaminates their beliefs and memories, it has ripple effects, it affects their later thoughts, their later intentions, their later behavior.”

Those effects can be deadly in the case of a public health crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. The World Health Organization has used the term “infodemic” to describe the intersection of misinformation and the pandemic. Falsehoods such as those suggesting that masks aren’t effective against the virus are potentially fatal for people who believe them.

Loftus agreed that the president’s false claims about the validity of the 2020 election are likely to have a deleterious effect on Americans’ trust in electoral process in the long run.

“Planting false information and getting people to believe or misremember can affect their later thoughts or their later behavior – and that kind of thing is likely to happen to here,” she said.

Resources, “US election 2020: Five viral vote claims fact-checked,” By Reality Check team;, “World leaders congratulate Joe Biden on his victory,” By Zamira Rahim and Martin Goillandeau;, “How the Election Process Works in the United Kingdom;”, “When Vote Fraud Is Claimed, Question Always Is: Did It Make a Difference?” By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY;, “US election 2020: Are Donald Trump’s voter fraud claims true?” By Victoria Craw and Benedict Brook; the, “America Won’t Trust Elections Until The Voter Fraud Is Investigated,” By Matthew Cochran;, “Voter Fraud Is Real—Here’s How Democrats Want to Steal the 2020 Election | Opinion,” By Newt Gingrich; usatoday, “Election results misinformation, fraud claims threaten to distort Americans’ views of the democratic process,” By Nathan Bomey;


Who is elected in a UK General Election?

In the UK, General Elections take place every 5years in May, unless Parliament votes to hold an election sooner. Candidates compete for a seat in the House of Commons.

General Elections in the UK are comprised of 650 individual elections that take place on one single day. Each election is in essence, a constituency and each constituency has a similar number of votes. When a candidate wins his constituency, s/he wins a seat in the House of Commons.

To acquire votes, candidates campaign in their constituencies. They will also join, in most cases, with a political party that mirrors their same values and ideals. Candidates general win votes by announcing the policies which will guide their decision-making process in Parliament. When a voter votes for a candidate, they are also voting for that political party.

How is a Prime Minister chosen?

If one political party is able to win more than half of the seats in the House of Commons, its leader will become the Prime Minister and be able to form the government. All of the other political parties are classified as the ‘opposition.’ The party with the second greatest number of seats is referred to as the main opposition party and its leader becomes the ‘leader of the opposition.’

What are the major political parties in the UK?

The three major political parties in the UK are the: Conservative Party (formerly known as the Tories), the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats (formerly known as the Whigs). The political party will assist the candidates across the whole of the country.

If a candidate is not affiliated with one of these major parties, they are usually classified as ‘independent.’

What are the major political parties in the UK?

The three major political parties in the UK are the: Conservative Party (formerly known as the Tories), the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats (formerly known as the Whigs). The political party will assist the candidates across the whole of the country.

If a candidate is not affiliated with one of these major parties, they are usually classified as ‘independent.’

What is a hung Parliament?

When none of the parties win more than half of the seats in the House of Commons, it is called a hung parliament.

In the case of a hung parliament, one of two things can take place. Either two or more parties can agree to work together to govern the country or the party with the most seats can also try to govern with a minority of seats in the House of Commons. They run the risk of defeat if they cannot get enough support on an important vote which may force a general election.

A coalition government is formed when two or more parties work together to govern the country.

Who may vote in the General Election?

In order to vote in the General Election, residents must be 18 years of age or older, a native of the United Kingdom, registered with the Electoral Register, and commonwealth citizens also have additional qualifications dependent upon where they reside.

What happens on Polling Day in the UK?

On Polling Day, every eligible resident may cast one vote in their local constituency. Polling may be done: in person at a polling station, by post or by proxy.

The candidate with the most votes becomes the local Member of Parliament (MP) for that area. This system is known as ‘first-past-the-post.’

The goal of each political party is to win 326 or more seats in the House of Commons in order to take power in the government.

Voter Fraud Is Real—Here’s How Democrats Want to Steal the 2020 Election

Make no mistake: Voter fraud is real. Democrats, the media and the so-called public interest groups on the political Left will tell you otherwise, but they are either lying or totally ignorant. Voter fraud is a threat to the integrity of our elections, the heart of our democracy—and Democrats want to make the problem worse with their new voting laws.

I believe this issue is incredibly important, now more than ever. So, as part of my ongoing Election 2020 podcast series, I decided to examine voter fraud in depth in this week’s episode of my podcast, “Newt’s World.”

My guest is Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. He is one of the preeminent experts on election law and election fraud, and he explains how Democrats are pushing proposals that will clearly make fraud more prevalent. Anyone who denies the existence of voter fraud in the U.S. needs to go to Heritage’s online database, where they will find 1,285 proven instances of it—including 1,110 criminal convictions. Some of the stories are quite striking. In 2016, for example, Elbert Melton, the former mayor of Gordon, Alabama, illegally notarized two ballots, without witnesses present, while running for re-election. Melton won the race by only 16 votes—many local and state races are decided by such small margins. He was convicted of absentee ballot fraud, removed from office and sentenced to one year in prison.

The biggest way to expand voter fraud is to expand voting by mail. And Democrats want to impose universal vote-by-mail across the country.

Traditionally, citizens can request that an absentee ballot be mailed if they have a valid excuse—the physically disabled or sick, of course our troops stationed abroad and their families. This is still the case in most states, but some, such as Oregon, simply mail an absentee ballot to every single registered voter.

The problem with mailing ballots like this is that lists of registered voters across the country are in terrible shape, and states do a poor job of cleaning their voter rolls. In fact, most states have given up on doing so. Every time they try, well-funded liberal groups accuse them of purging active, eligible voters from the rolls to suppress voting. As a result, ballots get mailed out to people who no longer live at the same addresses because they have moved or died.

Therefore, a precious item, perhaps our society’s most valuable—the ballot—is just out there, for anyone to exploit. It isn’t that difficult to imagine how people could fill out fraudulent ballots, mail them in and have them counted.

Voting by mail also leads to ballot harvesting, the practice of allowing third parties to collect voters’ ballots and turn them in together to polling stations. Imagine a political operative or a campaign volunteer showing up at your front door to collect your ballot and deliver it for you. Your ballot would no longer be secret but, more importantly, the operative or volunteer could pressure or even intimidate you to vote a certain way—especially if you are sick, elderly or speak poor English.

Another invitation for dishonest elections and inaccurate voting is same-day registration. Under this system, if you aren’t registered to vote, you can register on election day and immediately vote. Election officials have no time to verify your information or determine if you’re even an eligible voter who lives at the address that you provide.

Democrats are pushing all of these measures in earnest. They included each one and many more in H.R. 1, the very first bill that Democrats introduced after they retook control of the House in the 2018 midterm elections. And House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) included the same measures in her $3 trillion monstrosity of a bill that is supposedly meant to stimulate the economy amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Pelosi and the Democrats are using the virus as an excuse to impose on the country these voting laws and other far-left ideas. As Hans explains to me, Liberia had a successful election in 2014 despite the Ebola epidemic. Wisconsin also held an election without problems earlier this year, as did South Korea, amid the current pandemic. Polling places just need to institute the necessary safety measures, which is manageable to do. The fear-mongering from the media and the Left about the consequences of holding the 2020 election in-person has no basis in reality.

But Democrats are still pushing these voting laws as a deliberate strategy to maximize their ability to win elections. I’ve spent a lifetime in politics and don’t remember anything this bad, where people are so blatantly and openly willing to push illegality—in this case, in the form of voter fraud.

As Hans notes, Democrats have gotten to the point where they believe the ends justify the means. They believe that President Trump is so terrible and evil that anything they do to win, even cheating, is justified.

Miscellaneous (Military, Voting, Economy , Religion and etc) Postings

Exit mobile version