CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Trump Administration Claims on Voter Fraud
President Trump has been known to make repeated claims about widespread voter fraud in U.S. elections, notably claiming he would have won the popular vote (which he lost by over 2,000,000) if it wasn't for said voter fraud. On Sunday, President Trump's top policy adviser Stephen Miller reiterated this claim, saying "Voter fraud is a very serious issue in this country".
Notably, however, when Green Party candidate Jill Stein pressed for a recount in Pennsylvania, argued in court that "All available evidence suggests that the 2016 general election was not tainted by fraud or mistake".
So, do you believe that voter fraud is a significant issue (in this case significant meaning having an actual, tangible effect) in the U.S. electoral process, or no, and why?
Yes, obviously. When a person does not have to prove citizenship to register to vote, fraud will be rampant. The question is how much. Also, since you do not have to show ID to vote, anyone can vote who registers. Some places all you do is give your name and if it is on the registry, your good to go. They don't ask for anything.
Then you got ballot stuffing like in Broward County. How about the crap Detroit pulled. Thankfully we have the electoral college where one state, California, can cheat as much as they want, it will not affect the outcome since California votes Democrat no matter what.
It is hard to prove since nobody looks into it. There is also 4 million dead people still eligible to vote right now. My grandma was a life long Republican, but since she died she's voted Democrat. LOL
Notably, however, when Green Party candidate Jill Stein pressed for a recount in Pennsylvania, argued in court that "All available evidence suggests that the 2016 general election was not tainted by fraud or mistake".
Yet it was her recount that, prior to being stopped, already showed there to be more votes in Michigan districts than there were voters. Sorry, but fraud most certainly exists which is why I am all for requiring ID.
But here's the thing: without numbers, there is no proof that it happened to a substantial degree, as in to an extent that could actually have an impact on the election as Trump claimed.
I don't think anyone is claiming that our electoral process is utterly without error, but the claims being questioned are much bigger than the scope implied in this particular example.
The city of Detroit falsifying enough votes so that the electoral college in that district votes fraudulently is substantial voter fraud, it is more than substantial...it should be fiercely prosecuted and every person involved in any position of leadership encouraging or enabling false ballots should get the maximum prison sentences.
One vote is enough to change an election in a tight race, there should be zero voter fraud, one vote is substantial. There is no good reason why we cannot 100 percent stop and forever prevent voter fraud. It goes on only because crooked politicians need it to get elected.
The corruption and fraudulent voting in Detroit has been notorious for decades. This time it should be ended forever, and the same for anywhere voter fraud is found in single digits, dozens, hundreds, or thousands. Each fraudulent vote is substantial and every person who votes illegally should be in jail...and every poll worker who shows the slightest negligence of assuring the voters are legal should lose their job for incompetence and be suspect of receiving bribes.
I'd be willing to bet had the recount continued, the results would have been more substantial as well, and I'm sure if more investigating was done in every state (perhaps CA), the results would have been quite interesting.
You are willing to bet that, despite the fact that the official in question that you just cited disputes it?
I'm sorry, but your certainty isn't proof. People have been asking for proof of systemic voter fraud for decades, and there have been dozens of investigations across the country.
NONE of them have come up with legitimate proof of substantial voter fraud. So if it is such a problem, why is it so impossible to substantiate it?
NONE of them have come up with legitimate proof of substantial voter fraud
That all comes down to what is defined as "substantial". One vote can change which way a state goes, so any evidence of fraud is significant. Also, each election is different and should be treated as such. To say no evidence was found in a prior election does not mean it can't happen.
Can you point to a single non local election that came down to one vote? Because otherwise you are using an incredibly unrealistic hypothetical in a discussion about whether or not significant voter fraud actually happens.
And what I mean by significant is actually having an effect on the electoral process. The only evidence you gave me was about a .016% discrepency.
That is not statistically significant. At all. So since you said it is currently happening to significant degrees, where is the proof?
Can you point to a single non local election that came down to one vote?
No, but that's not the point.
The only evidence you gave me was about a .016% discrepency.
Actually it was .16%, and here's a good example. In 1960, Kennedy won the popular vote by a margin of just .17%. No, not exactly .16, but close enough for these purposes. This is my point. You don't need a discrepancy of millions to make a difference.
Kennedy won by 99,500+ votes more than the example you used, across several districts (which is part of the problem).
Not exactly comparable in terms of vote count. Additionally, your very example proves that even when electoral issues do come up and are incredibly small, the system STILL catches them.
And for the first part, yes, it is the point. We are talking about voter fraud because some people are calling for increased regulation that has been demonstrated to disenfranchise some voters. We have also seen numerous instances where state legislators claim to be trying to prevent voter fraud, whilst explicitly trying to disenfranchise certain voters.
So if we are going to accept the idea that we will be disenfranchising some voters, we need to prove the problem is both real, and worth it. Your hypothetical notion that an election could come down to a single vote isn't legitimate proof demonstrating the need to protect against such an event unless, at any point in our history since the advent of the modern electoral process, such an event occured.
Otherwise you are disenfranchising votes based off of fiction, which is unacceptable.
No the example is not directly comparable, but if discrepancies are being found in multiple districts, it stands to reason it's happening in others as well.
that has been demonstrated to disenfranchise some voters
Arguments have been made, but none are valid and the idea has not been demonstrated to do so.
every precinct where as few as one fraudulent vote was found should be thoroughly investigated, every fraudulent voter should do prison time, and every precinct worker who is found to have the slightest cloud questioning integrity should be permanently banned from working in any aspect of voting and jailed if there is evidence to warrant prosecution.
Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. Though a sinner do evil an hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before him: But it shall not be well with the wicked, neither shall he prolong his days, which are as a shadow; because he feareth not before God.
Anybody who cheats in elections or fails to stop voter fraud when they are in position to stop it needs some fear of God put in them.
It's pretty safe to say there were at least a couple million fraudulent Democratic votes, and probably some Republican as well but only a tiny fraction compared to Democratic fraud, based only on what is clearly obvious in places like Detroit.
It is also obvious that in the last couple hours of the election hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes suddenly poured in trying to take away Trumps consistent solid lead in the voting count.
Voter fraud is like cockroaches, where one is found there is likely a thousand in the walls. One is significant, it shows either willful invitation of cockroaches for nefarious purposes or carelessness about keeping a clean environment.
The careless housekeeper needs to be fired and the problem should be entirely eradicated.
There is no logical reason why even one fraudulent vote should slip through the cracks like a cockroach without being smashed.
These morally bankrupt people who say a little voter fraud never hurt anybody should be in jail with the cockroaches for aiding and abetting criminal conduct.
Anybody who tries to brush a voter fraud cockroach under the carpet should be in jail.
You know that a person who insists "one fraudulent vote" is not significant is a person who invites and approves of corruption and such individuals should be barred from any area of public service, paid or unpaid. They should be in jail for trying to create an environment which supports and tolerates corruption.
"Of the data available, though, machines tallied at least 388 more ballots, according to a Detroit News analysis of the records. That’s 0.16 percent of the 248,000 ballots cast in the city that voted for Clinton 95 percent to 3 percent over Trump."
I'm sorry, but are you really trying to tell me that a .16% discrepancy is statistically significant, let alone significant enough to claim widespread voter fraud to the tune of 3 to 5 million people?
Additionally from your source:
"Washtenaw County Elections Director Ed Golembiewski said discrepancies tend to “even themselves out” — there are usually about as many precincts whose machines report more votes than fewer votes. But he said the large number of precincts with over-votes in Detroit isn’t necessarily significant.
“It’s usually human error,” Golembiewski said. “I have not seen anyone intentionally try to run an extra ballot. You aren’t going to rig an election three ballots at a time. You’re going to need a far more systematic and thorough approach than a couple of people here and there stuffing three extra ballots.”
And that's ultimately what it comes down to. Our system does not exist in such a way that anything short of local elections could actually be influenced by the type of voter fraud that Trump and yourself have claimed. It's just not feasible. It would require tens if not hundreds of thousands of people coordinating a large scale conspiracy that involves tens of thousands of polling places, all without a single leak.
Steven Miller scares the SHIT out of me! I actually expected to see him click his heels together and yell HEIL! Trump! When he finished talking!!!!!! Really, hasn't the last week seemed like we are being "governed" by a bunch of madmen!?? (And women!) GO! SNL!
