5 votes

Counting Votes / Avoiding Fraud 2014

As evidenced by the recent primary season we all endured, I'm thinking that the biggest thing holding back this movement is that the votes are unverifiable.

We can take a walk down the conspiracy tunnel, we can claim to be robbed, we can do whatever we want, but no one will pay any attention. People will only start to care if we can show some solid evidence of systematic fraud. I think the general public will only take notice if they believe their vote may also be manipulated. And, I also think that unless the general public gets interested, there wont be much change in the way votes are counted and verified.

I propose that we identify a hundred or so precincts where we are organized and have a decent sized, healthy liberty crowd. And where we also have a race that has a decent liberty candidate on the ballet in 2014.

In the selected precincts, we put a liberty "desk" as close to the entrance of the polling place as we legally can, with a big sing out front that says .... if you voted for "Candidate XYZ" help us make sure your vote counts. At the grass roots level, the people going to vote need to know to expect this, so we get the maximum level of buy in.

The Liberty desk will be manned by someone who is fairly well known among the liberty group in that area, and there should also be a Notary of Public at the desk with him or her. After voting, we all go to the desk and sign a statement saying who we are, and that we voted for "Candidate XYZ" and right there, we get it witnessed and notarized.

When the official results for the election are made available for that precinct, if they say we got less votes than we did, then we start the law suits necessary to bring about some real reform.

If we are indeed being cheated and we can show that in a decent number of locations all across the US, then we may be able to get some action.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Save your breath

No one on this site wants to hear real solutions to any of the problems. Evidence: http://www.dailypaul.com/252505/support-the-rules-change-and... where I suggest a way we could use the FEC to validate votes and raise the trust level to the high 90%'s.

By the way, I agree with your premise but you probably can't get anywhere if you label the desk a 'liberty' desk. The solution has to be non-partisan and apply to all US citizens equally. Otherwise, the blowback with kill it for one reason or another.

'Liberty' matters

Other than the people voting for a liberty candidate, no one wants to go on record about how they voted.

The people with their finger in their ears, humming loudly, and trusting the voting machines to count things correctly still feel like admitting who they voted for in a verifiable way is somehow not productive, and that hidden ballets protect them from discrimination, etc. But those people aren't voting for liberty candidates, they are voting for whomever their news network of choice tells them is best.

But that is irrelevant, because we only need to verify the vote for OUR guy. And, luckily, the people voting for liberty candidates are significantly more willing to admit that out loud, especially if they can see it will help the cause.

Making sure that the desk is clearly marked in a way that makes it totally obvious which people we are hoping will stop in and chat is important. The liberty group would likely ignore a desk that was just some politician, or poll asking pointless questions so they can make some slanted news report based on trends and statistics and other such nonsense.

Not so sure...

Not to be blunt but in my area, people are secretive about being a liberty supporter. This is Big R country and bosses do discriminate publicly on how one views the government. It's very easy to find people to vote our way but include any publicity and the turnout goes to nil.

And as to my linked suggestion, it was to increase the accuracy of the various precincts reporting secret ballots to the FEC. That's not displaying anything publicly.

That's ok

I'm not suggesting that this should be done in every precinct. That would be a huge undertaking, and would have little additional value above and beyond selecting a few hundred precincts where it is feasible. We only need enough to show a pattern, not overturn the election results. Its not about the 2014 results, its about making 2016 a more fair playing field. We only need enough evidence of obvious vote counting fraud that a facebook post will be convincing enough to make the sleeping giant question the validity of the polls.

This may not work in an area such as yours, so the energy should be invested in other areas. I'm in St Charles, MO. We had our proposed Liberty Chair unlawfully arrest at our caucus this year. I'd be willing to bet that every single person in the liberty group here would happily go on record, officially to get their vote to count in 2014, especially if they knew that the overall goal was to prove that the other guys are cheating. I bet there are some precincts in maine, iowa, nevada, alaska, and idaho who are in the same boat. Certainly there are enough places where this scenario is feasible that we could shine a light on the problem.

I looked over your proposal, and something along those lines is probably necessary in order to actually repair the voting nightmare that is the current US ballot system. But, as soon as you say "it starts with an amendment to the constitution" you have to realize that you have set yourself up for failure. Nothing "starts" with an amendment to the constitution. Amendments are impossible to pass without popular support, which requires people to actually care. No one actually cares right now because the media isn't in their face telling them to care, and there is no obvious, undeniable, indisputable evidence of a widespread problem.

Thnx for the reply

If presented in a non-partisan, unbiased way, I think it could have significant support. Picture this...

I some sheep heard of such an amendment proposal, he would likely check for partisan tricks. If none were found, he would be forced to think for himself as to whether he supported it or not. Barring that, he would be getting his info from MSM and talking heads. I have specifically made all pieces such that I doubt anyone would take a stand against it publicly. That would be political suicide. This is the normal tactic of getting things banned "for the children". They make it impossibly to publicly go against it. Same here.

I also think there are plenty of viral videos exposing election issues to warrant getting the initial movement off the ground.