Tag Archives: rights

“Sorting Error”

Posted on by
Reply

Fifty thousand Franklin County, OH, voters were mailed the wrong ballots last week. It was a scanner sorting error. That’s what the county’s Board of Elections claimed last Friday.

The affected voters in Franklin County received ballots meant for residents elsewhere in the county and so contained incorrect information for local races[.]

That’s an interesting error. The local post office doing final sorting for the local final delivery routes didn’t notice the misaddressed envelopes? The mailman doing the actual final delivery didn’t notice the misaddressed envelopes as he put them in recipients’ mail boxes?

Franklin County has a population of some 1,300,000. Taking a naïve guesstimate of a typical family having two adults and two underage children, that works out to some 650,000 voters. 50,000 of them works out to a bit over 7.5% of the county’s voters getting the wrong ballots.

Stipulate, arguendo, that the scanner errors were entirely innocent, of the sort that fits in the stuff happens category.

That’s still an enormous error, an unacceptably high error, for mail-in ballots. Absentee ballots—generated one by each on an as-requested basis and on proof that the requester is both who he says he is and eligible to vote—do not have this sort of error, and absentee balloting does not have any error of this magnitude.

Innocent or nefarious, mail-in balloting is just too unreliable.

Update: Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania, population 349,000, is a heavily Republican county in the heavily Republican southwestern part of the State. 58,000 mail-in ballots were…misplaced on the way out the door; the intended recipients never got them. That’s roughly a third of the voting population whose ballots were lost.

[T]he Westmoreland County Election Bureau is placing blame on a contractor hired by the county to mail out ballots this election cycle.
“The first batch of processed and approved applications was submitted to the County’s mail house, Mid-West Direct on October 3rd. It has been brought to our attention today that Mid-West did not sent out the ballots on Tuesday as indicated.”

The first batch. The screwup supposedly has been fixed, and new ballots “are in the mail.” “Processed and approved applications?” Whose applications? Absentee ballots don’t get batched up; those ballots get sent to the requestor as each application gets approved. This is the county’s approval for mail-in.

This is yet another demonstration of the unreliability of just willy-nilly mailing out ballots instead of staying with on-demand and -proof absentee ballot voting.

Voting “Anti-fraud Measures”

Posted on by
Reply

New Jersey is experiencing more voting…problems…on the heels of Paterson’s voter fraud that led to indictments of four city councilmen. Now, other voters

have received ballots meant for people who have moved out of the state and for deceased voters

Not to worry, though.

some election officials say they’re confident that anti-fraud measures will take care of it, according to local reports.

On the other hand, worry, though. If these election officials’ “anti-fraud measures” are adequate to the task, why didn’t they catch and prevent these ballots from being mailed to the wrong people? Why didn’t they prevent the graveyard ballots?

Freedom of Speech

Posted on by
2

Not here. Not ever.  You do not have permission to criticize us or any thing, subject, object, or … that we hold above reproach, especially that of your commoner selves.

According to a draft of the Loudoun County Public School district board’s proposed speech code, obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, employees would not be allowed to criticize the school district’s “commitment to action-oriented equity practices” in all forms of public and personal communication.

And

The code briefly acknowledges employees have a First Amendment right to engage in protected speech, but says that right “may be outweighed” by the school district’s interest in “promoting internal … and external community harmony and peace” as well as “class equity, racial equity, and the goal to root out systemic racism.”

And

Employees would be prohibited from “retaliating” against accusers, even if the accusations are false.

Your Betters say so, you racist thugs.

The Racism of the Left

Posted on by
Reply

Separate from the segregationist identity politics so loudly practiced by the Left and its Progressive-Democratic Party is this. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two Arizona voting cases

Arizona Republican Party v Democratic National Committee and Brnovich v Democratic National Committee involving Arizona election laws that ban ballot harvesting and voting in other precincts.

As the Editorial Board puts it [emphasis added],

The Ninth Circuit and some other lower courts have interpreted [the Voting Rights Act] Section 2 broadly to enjoin any law that allegedly has a disparate impact on minorities no matter if the laws have a non-discriminatory intent. The Arizona cases provide the High Court an opportunity to clarify and tighten the standards for Section 2 claims.
Liberals are warning that the Supreme Court in the Arizona cases could “destroy what remains of the Voting Rights Act,” as one headline howled.

And the money quote to end the editorial:

As ever, the left is playing racial politics as the election approaches.

Censorship

Posted on by
Reply

It’s active, biased, and deliberate in social media. And Facebook, Twitter, and Alphabet intend on stepping it up during the remainder of this election season.

Twitter, for instance, says on its website that it will “require people to remove Tweets” that include “statements which are intended to influence others to violate recommended COVID-19 related guidance from global or local health authorities to decrease someone’s likelihood of exposure to COVID-19.” Among the problematic statements the company lists under that category is “social distancing is not effective.”

But Twitter won’t say how its censors will reconcile the myriad local health authorities who disagree among each other on the proper steps to take.

Facebook on its website outlines a similar policy using similar language, with the company stating that it will “remove content with false claims or conspiracy theories that have been flagged by leading global health organizations and local health authorities,” including “claims that are designed to discourage treatment or taking appropriate precautions.”

Facebook also declines to say how its censor will reconcile the recommendations and instructions of those local health authorities.

Alphabet makes its bias unembarrassedly obvious:

YouTube has adopted a virtually identical policy, stating that it “does not allow content that spreads medical misinformation that contradicts the World Health Organization (WHO) or local health authorities’ medical information about COVID-19.”

Never mind that WHO, as an apologist for the People’s Republic of China has no credibility whatsoever.

That’s just the social media’s bias regarding the Wuhan Virus. Their behavior is even more dangerous in the political arena.

Last month, Facebook was reportedly developing a “contingency plan,” intended to address scenarios in which Trump or his campaign attempted to dispute or delegitimize the results of the 2020 election.

But nothing planned to respond to the Progressive-Democrats’ openly stated intention to dispute the results of the 2020 election.

Zuckerberg went on:

the company will “attach an informational label to content that seeks to delegitimize the outcome of the election or discuss the legitimacy of voting methods, for example, by claiming that lawful methods of voting will lead to fraud.”
“This label will provide basic authoritative information about the integrity of the election and voting methods[.]”

All while he refuses to identify his “authorities,” much less to demonstrate their authoritativeness.

Be careful out there.

And vote, despite these Leftists’ efforts to delegitimize your vote.