Are you an election denier?

[biobook]

Hmm, let's think what was different about this election than the past 58.

Was it the fact that safeguards that were put in place to prevent fraud were unilaterally and oftentimes unlawfully removed?

Or was there a major increase in the form of voting that the radical right wing former president (Jimmy Carter) said was most susceptible to fraud?

I haven't looked into this, and haven't seen anyone else post information about it.  Can you summarize what you've learned about the past 58 elections, and the incidence of fraud there?

Try to provide evidence as statements of fact, rather asking questions.

I haven't followed everything Carter has said in the past 97 years - what specifically are you referring to?

[zh cohen]

I haven't looked into this, and haven't seen anyone else post information about it. 

You haven't seen anyone post information about the changes to election law that were made before the 2020 elections?

Maybe you should learn a bit about the topic you are commenting on before doing so.

Try to provide evidence as statements of fact, rather asking questions.

Seems like something you should tell this person...

So in the previous 58 presidential elections everything was just hunky-dory, and it's only in 2020 that significant fraud occurred, and then only by one party?

[aygart]

Really?  70% of Republicans have been claiming that when a Democrat wins it could only have been due to fraud?  I don't recall this ever happening.

There is a large gap between that and hunkybdory

[biobook]

Or was there a major increase in the form of voting that the radical right wing former president (Jimmy Carter) said was most susceptible to fraud?

Maybe you should learn a bit about the topic you are commenting on before doing so.

Okay, I learned a bit.  Here's the info you seem to be referencing:

In 2004, Carter (D) and James Baker (R) put together a report on voting, which found fault with several aspects of in-person and absentee voting, and proposed ideas for remedying and researching them.

Without the accompanying context, one half-sentence from this report was cited by R's in 2020 as a reason to prohibit mail-in voting: "Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud..." They ignored the rest of the report, which explained that safeguards for ballot integrity would need to be put in place, in which case absentee voting would be fine.  These changes did happen over the subsequent 16 years.

When he heard how his report was being mis-used, Carter released a statement saying “I approve the use of absentee ballots and have been using them for more than five years.”

[biobook]

More extensive quote from Carter:

Jimmy Carter himself finally pushed back against misinterpretations of his work. The Georgia native issued a statement denouncing efforts by his state’s lawmakers to rewrite the election laws in their favor. Republican lawmakers there are currently considering measures that would sharply cut absentee voting and early voting, citing the risk of voter fraud in what appears to be a thinly veiled attempt to depress Democratic turnout. “I also am disappointed that advocates for these restrictive changes have repeatedly and selectively referenced a report prepared by a 2005 commission that I co-chaired with former Secretary of State James Baker,” Carter said.

“While our report noted a few good and bad examples of vote-by-mail practices, its main recommendation was that further study of voting by mail was needed,” Carter went on to explain. “In the 16 years since the report’s release, vote-by-mail practices have progressed significantly as new technologies have been developed. In light of these advances, I believe that voting by mail can be conducted in a manner that ensures election integrity. This is just one of several ways to expand access to the voting process for voters across the state, regardless of political affiliation.”

https://newrepublic.com/article/161666/carter-baker-commission-report-republican-attacks-election-reform

[CountValentine]

Was it the fact that safeguards that were put in place to prevent fraud were unilaterally and oftentimes unlawfully removed?

State after state ruled there was no widespread voter fraud. Most of those states were run by R's.
I would you are educated enough to face reality.

[CountValentine]

He has lied over and over to his base, and they swallow it. Just look at the current problem he has. Has been caught in multiple lies in less than a week and all we hear is you can't trust the DOJ. That is why describing the base as a cult is accurate.

[zh cohen]

Okay, I learned a bit.  Here's the info you seem to be referencing:

In 2004, Carter (D) and James Baker (R) put together a report on voting, which found fault with several aspects of in-person and absentee voting, and proposed ideas for remedying and researching them.

Without the accompanying context, one half-sentence from this report was cited by R's in 2020 as a reason to prohibit mail-in voting: "Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud..." They ignored the rest of the report, which explained that safeguards for ballot integrity would need to be put in place, in which case absentee voting would be fine.  These changes did happen over the subsequent 16 years.

Here is what the report says about mail in voting -

A growing number of Americans vote by mail. Oregon moved entirely to a vote-by-mail system in 1998, and the practice of casting ballots by mail has continued to expand nationwide as voters and election officials seek alternatives to the traditional system of voting at polling stations. The state legislatures of California and of Washington state have considered legislation to expand the use of vote by mail, and in 24 states no excuse is required to vote absentee.

The impact of vote by mail is mixed. Proponents argue that vote by mail facilitates participation among groups that experience low voter turnout, such as elderly Americans and Native Americans.

While vote by mail appears to increase turnout for local elections, there is no evidence that it significantly expands participation in federal elections. Moreover, it raises concerns about privacy, as citizens voting at home may come under pressure to vote for certain candidates and it increases the risk of fraud. Oregon appears to have avoided significant fraud in its vote-by-mail elections by introducing safeguards to protect ballot integrity, including signature verification. Vote by mail is, however, likely to increase the risk of fraud and of contested elections in other states, where the population is more mobile, where there is some history of troubled elections, or where the safeguards for ballot integrity are weaker.

The case of King County, Washington, is instructive. In the 2004 gubernatorial elections, when two in three ballots were cast by mail, authorities lacked an effective system to track the number of ballots sent or returned. As a result, King County election officials were unable to account for all absentee ballots. Moreover, a number of provisional ballots were accepted without signature verification. The failure to account for all absentee ballots and to verify signatures on provisional ballots became issues in the protracted litigation that followed Washington state's 2004 gubernatorial election.

Vote by mail is popular but not a panacea for declining participation. While there is little evidence of fraud in Oregon, where the entire state votes by mail, absentee balloting in other states has been one of the major sources of fraud. Even in Oregon, better precautions are needed to ensure that the return of ballots is not intercepted.

...
(I'm leaving out a paragraph about early voting and the added cost of vote by mail)

Recommendation on Vote by Mail -
4.2.1 The Commission encourages further research on the pros and cons of vote by mail and of early voting.

As far as absentee voting, the commission wrote -

Fraud occurs in several ways. Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud. A notorious recent case of absentee ballot fraud was Miami's mayoral election of 1998, and in that case, the judge declared the election fraudulent and called for a new election. Absentee balloting is vulnerable to abuse in several ways: Blank ballots mailed to the wrong address or to large residential buildings might get intercepted. Citizens who vote at home, at nursing homes, at the workplace, or in a church are more susceptible to pressure, overt and subtle, or to intimidation. Vote buying schemes are far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail. States should therefore reduce the risks of fraud and abuse in absentee voting by prohibiting "third party" organizations, candidates, and political party activists from handling absentee ballots. States should also make sure that absentee ballots received by election officials before Election Day are kept secure until they are opened and counted.

(The rest of this section is about voter registration and the ability for representatives of candidates or parties to challenge voters eligibility)

Recommendations of Absentee Ballot and Voter Registration Fraud -
5.2.1 State and local jurisdictions should prohibit a person from handling absentee ballots other than the voter, an acknowledged family member, the U.S. postal service or other legitimate shipper, or election officials. The practice in some states of allowing candidates or party workers to pick up and deliver absentee ballots should be eliminated.

Having read the whole thing, which of us summarized the commission's view on mail-in-voting better? Which "one half-sentence from this report" am I taking out of context?

When he heard how his report was being mis-used, Carter released a statement saying “I approve the use of absentee ballots and have been using them for more than five years.”

His changing his mind does not mean that his report was being misused. It means that he believed one thing then and something else now. He claims that it was the new evidence that changed his mind.

[biobook]

Which "one half-sentence from this report" am I taking out of context?

None, you didn't provide even half a sentence.  You just made a vague reference to Carter's report, and left me to figure out what you're talking about.  What I wrote was "one half-sentence from this report was cited by R's in 2020 as a reason to prohibit mail-in voting".  The Republicans who were reported to use the report this way were Bill Barr and Kayleigh McEneney in early September, and Carter quickly spoke up so as to suppress the spread of misinformation.

His changing his mind does not mean that his report was being misused. It means that he believed one thing then and something else now. He claims that it was the new evidence that changed his mind.

He believed then that mail-in ballots would work only if certain safeguards were in place, but in 2005 they were not.  He still believes that certain safeguards would be needed, and in 2020 they are.

More extensive quote from Carter:

Jimmy Carter himself finally pushed back against misinterpretations of his work. The Georgia native issued a statement denouncing efforts by his state’s lawmakers to rewrite the election laws in their favor. Republican lawmakers there are currently considering measures that would sharply cut absentee voting and early voting, citing the risk of voter fraud in what appears to be a thinly veiled attempt to depress Democratic turnout. “I also am disappointed that advocates for these restrictive changes have repeatedly and selectively referenced a report prepared by a 2005 commission that I co-chaired with former Secretary of State James Baker,” Carter said.

“While our report noted a few good and bad examples of vote-by-mail practices, its main recommendation was that further study of voting by mail was needed,” Carter went on to explain. “In the 16 years since the report’s release, vote-by-mail practices have progressed significantly as new technologies have been developed. In light of these advances, I believe that voting by mail can be conducted in a manner that ensures election integrity. This is just one of several ways to expand access to the voting process for voters across the state, regardless of political affiliation.”

https://newrepublic.com/article/161666/carter-baker-commission-report-republican-attacks-election-reform

Although Bill Barr used Carter's report before the electionto suggest that mail-in ballots could not be trusted, he did accept the election results afterwards. He stated that there was no widespread election fraud.  In his 1/6 testimony, he said that after one meeting with Trump at the end of Nov, he asked Mark Meadows "How long is he going to carry on with this stolen election stuff?" He said he "was somewhat demoralized, because I thought, boy, if he really believes this stuff, he has lost contact with — he’s become detached from reality if he really believes this stuff.”  He resigned soon after that.

[WAM]

Here is what the report says about mail in voting -

As far as absentee voting, the commission wrote -

Having read the whole thing, which of us summarized the commission's view on mail-in-voting better? Which "one half-sentence from this report" am I taking out of context?

His changing his mind does not mean that his report was being misused. It means that he believed one thing then and something else now. He claims that it was the new evidence that changed his mind.

That's very nice. But if I close my eyes and forget what I just read, I could just call you a card-carrying member of the election denyer's cult. You might even worship orangutans.

Yay! Now my life is good!

[Yehuda57]

None Carter quickly spoke up so as to suppress the spread of misinformation.

It's not misinformation to quote a report that he wrote. Even if he did indeed change his mind, he only did so publicly after the report was quoted. It's far more "misinformation" to call quoting him misinformation than quoting a report he wrote and only announced changing his mind about after it was brought to the public's attention, and when changing his mind was of extreme importance to his political side.

[CountValentine]

That's very nice. But if I close my eyes and forget what I just read, I could just call you a card-carrying member of the election denyer's cult. You might even worship orangutans.

Or when you open your eyes you might be in 2022. 

[WAM]

Or when you open your eyes you might be in 2022. 

Perhaps you open your eyes whenever I close mine? That would at least have both of us making sense.

[biobook]

It's not misinformation to quote a report that he wrote. Even if he did indeed change his mind, he only did so publicly after the report was quoted. It's far more "misinformation" to call quoting him misinformation than quoting a report he wrote and only announced changing his mind about after it was brought to the public's attention, and when changing his mind was of extreme importance to his political side.

Et tu?

[Yehuda57]

Et tu?

Argue the points in their merit, don't lump anyone arguing a specific point into the same bucket of conspiracy theorist nut jobs. That's what CV has been doing, and apparently you too.

[CountValentine]

Argue the points in their merit, don't lump anyone arguing a specific point into the same bucket of conspiracy theorist nut jobs. That's what CV has been doing, and apparently you too.

When you have 70% of R's believing the big lie where should I lump them in?

[imayid2]

Might the fact Ds have consistently opposed common sense election integrity measures, like ID requirements (supported by an overwhelming majority of the country), be an aggravating factor here?

[Yehuda57]

When you have 70% of R's believing the big lie where should I lump them in?

Thanks for proving my point. Am I an election denier? I think I'm pretty clear about that in this forum. Yet I argue one specific point and get this

Et tu?

Is @zh cohen an election denier? I dunno, but if he is, I would reconsider thinking that everyone who is is crazy. He's quite obviously not.

[CountValentine]

Thanks for proving my point. Am I an election denier? I think I'm pretty clear about that in this forum. Yet I argue one specific point and get this

No, I don't believe you are an election denier. I asked some members and they got upset and never answered.
Did I just disprove your point by not lumping 100% R's together?

Is @zh cohen an election denier?

Well? 

[CountValentine]

Might the fact Ds have consistently opposed common sense election integrity measures, like ID requirements (supported by an overwhelming majority of the country), be an aggravating factor here?

You think R's trying to suppress votes might be at play or do you only see one side?