Husband arrested in Florida for trying to get a ballot for his dead wife

This story was one the midday news here in Tampa. The sheriff arrested a man for trying get an absentee ballot for his dead wife. The man’s excuse was that, “He was testing the system.”

I wonder how many others are testing it? In some states it’s pretty easy to get access to more than one ballot.

You mean like the President encouraged?

President Trump did NOT tell people to actually VOTE twice. He said if you vote by mail, you should also go to the polls in person. If the Democrats’ “system” works as they’ve touted it to, you should see that your name has been crossed off the registry as already having voted. If it has NOT been marked off, that means that your mail-in ballot hasn’t been received and counted and you should then vote in person to insure that your vote IS counted. It’s only voting twice if BOTH your mail-in ballot and your in-person ballot are counted.

1 Like

I think that there is at best a 50% chance that Trump will win. If he loses outright because the Democrats won the election argument, so be it, although I think that the middle class will be in for a world of hurt.

This will be especially true if the Democrats also take the Senate. They will pack the Supreme Court and make Washington, DC and Porto Rico into states which will solidify their position permanently. Voters should have noted in the debate that Biden refused to answer when Trump asked him if he was going to pack the Supreme Court.

I also think that there is a strong chance that the Democrats could steal the election. It could be by stuffing the ballot boxes with fake votes, deep sixing Republican votes when they think see them or in the courts, as they tried to do in Florida in 2000. Another threat is posed by these states, like Colorado, which said that their Electoral votes will be cast according the national popular vote, not the popular vote in their state. I believe that is unconstitutional, but it would have to hashed out in the courts.

It’s really sad and scary when honest elections have become a concern after this country has enjoyed a long history of generally honest results. One of the bedrocks of a democracy is the faith that people have in the electoral process. When that is severely damaged, the nation is in grave danger.

It is amazing that huge technological advances have resulted in less faith in the electoral process, not more. The sad part is the education system is responsible for creating this mess. A pox on the far left educators who have taught their students that ramming their opinions down the throats of everyone else is now a moral imperative.

I won’t say 100% that I disagree. I don’t know if Biden will try, though I admit that it would be extremely unpopular with at least 50% of the country.


That said, this is an escalation of the shenanigans that have been going on for quite some time and include delaying over 100 federal appointments, delaying Obama’s SCOTUS pick and now turning around and doing the exact opposite.

You and PD can try to argue that this is somehow different, but I think if you ask most people, even some Republicans they would agree that it’s the same.

That said there have been historically a lot of shenanigans played in the process of nomination that began, I’d say, with the fact that during Senate recess the President can appoint a justice to the court without Senate approval. This allows the justice appointed to sit on the court, not until the Senate comes back from recess. That said, the Senate would not be able to deliberate on the Recess Appointment until the end of their next session.

So something like this:


Eventually, Presidents learned they could just drag their feet on a nominee until the Senate went on recess (that early in our history was up to 6 months long) and appoint a justice without Senate approval. And for the record, a recess is a period of 4 days off or more (and ironically call it a recess even though it is not). This was generally the practice if the POTUS and the Senate were from different parties.

The next level of shenanigans is that the Senate no longer takes a formal recess, yet we know they take more than 4 days off at times. How do they do it? It’s called the “Pro Forma Session”. This is a process by which (usually) the Jr. most senator is appointed chair by the President Pro Tempore, he and the clerk show up and, over the next 30 seconds, the Jr. most senator declares that the Senate will be adjourned for three days. Want a week off, just do this three times.

What about a quorum? A quorum is assumed unless someone demands a roll call (I’m not making this stuff up) thus a single Senator delegated chairman can take a vote with no one present to take up to three days off as much as the Senate wishes. This prevents a formal recess and the President cannot make recess appointments, ever. And Recess Appointments aren’t just for SCOTUS but a lot of positions within the government.


The Senate can drag its feet on appointments gambling on the next President being more friendly. And they can also rush appointments though.


The next level of shenanigans was the reduction of approval from 2/3 to 3/5ths to 1/2 that it is today (as we know that in a tie the VP will side with the President).


Other shenanigans are waiting in the wings.

Packing the court.


Impeaching a Justice for political reasons


And the last is the fact that the President can force the Congress back into session. After that session is over, if the House and Senate cannot agree on the length of time off, the President get’s to decide and of course, if he says 4 days or more, he can make recess appointments at the time.


And here we are.

And yet, he did,

Quote from the clip above:

“If you get the unsolicited ballot send it in and go make sure it’s counted…”

So far it sounds like you’ve said…But, let’s continue.

“…and if it doesn’t tabulate you vote”.

That is voting twice. Period.

The fact that you’re vote hasn’t been tabulated yet does not mean it won’t be. Given the number of votes coming in by mail, it might take a few extra days.

The fact is the law makes no stipulation for you to cast a second vote if you show up at a poll and your vote hasn’t yet been counted.

Therefore, the President is encouraging people to vote twice which is Illegal.

Now, I agree the process needs to be cleaned up, for sure, but that fact does not allow you to break the law. If you submit a ballot by mail and show up at a polling location and vote knowing you already voted, then you’ve broken the law.

The solution?

Don’t vote by mail. If your concerned about mail in ballots then just don’t vote by mail, no one is forcing anyone to vote by mail, therefore there is no reason to do it AND vote in person unless you are trying to cheat and get your vote cast twice. If you’re going to go in person anyway, then just go in person to vote. There is NO REASON to vote by mail and then show up at a polling place unless you are hoping your vote will be counted twice. ANYONE that does this and has two ballots cast should be guilty of voting twice and should suffer whatever consequences there are for doing this regardless of party and no excuses that “I was testing the system”.

And yes, the President has undeniably encouraged people to break the law. Period.

Wrong again (as usual.). Your vote by mail MUST be TABULATED (NOT necessarily COUNTED) by the time the polls have opened and the registry must show that your ballot has been RECEIVED (NOT necessarily COUNTED). If it HASN’T been tabulated, that’s prima facie evidence that your mail-in ballot has NOT (for a wide variety of reasons–most of them nefarious) been received by the election board of your jurisdiction and casting a vote in person will insure that your vote IS counted in the final totals. If the registry shows that you have voted in person, then, if your mailed ballot somehow DOES later turn up it can be discarded as invalid. It’s up to those COUNTING votes to insure that no one’s votes are counted more than once.

None of this explains why a person intending to vote in person would do so by mail and then go and vote in person.

If you’re legitimately worried about your vote not being counted via the mail in process, then go in person. The rest is simply a distraction from the fact that the President encouraged people to vote twice.

As far as the “must be tabulated”. Says who? Where is the relevant law that determines that? Is it a federal law, a state law? Is it a law in all 50 states, or just some? Which ones?

Here in Florida, you can go on-line and find out if your absentee ballot has been received and accepted. I don’t know if you can do that in these Democrat, Johnie come lately to mail-in ballot states that are sending out ballots like campaign literature.

The big worry is that the Democrats will flip some Congressional seats they don’t deserve. The chances of Trump winning in California are one in a million. There are Republican seats in the California congressional delegation, however. If the Democrats can flip more of those via voter fraud, it will insulate them from the possibility of not losing the House because of Nancy Pelosi’s rotten leadership.

You can’t vote for any Congressional Democrat candidate, no matter how qualified they might seem, because of the Pelosi. Once they get to Congress, she will control them. If they don’t play ball with her, she will cut them off at the ankles, forget the knees.

Pelosi is the most evil person in the entire government. I have no doubt that she wears shoes to cover her cloven feet and has a hair style that covers her horns. The pictures of her in the San Francisco beauty shop should have included one when her hair was wet. Then we could have seen her horns. Pelosi is totally despicable.

1 Like

I feel the same way about McConnell

That said, in an effort to find a middle ground, I agree that our elections need to be secured and above reproach. The problem is both sides will play politics with any attempt to do so and jockey for advantage in their own parties interest rather than in the interests of the American people.

You think Dems will do it more, I think the opposite.

So where do we go from here?

One thing that would help would be if your side would agree to voter IDs. It’s simple concept, and it takes a lot of the fire out of the issue of voter fraud. Instead of opposing the concept of showing ID to vote, you should support facilitating the acquisition of IDs for people you think are in your voter base.

But no. You fight showing IDs to vote tooth and nail. Why? It leaves a taint on your position. You don’t want the IDs shown because that makes fraud easier. You need an ID to get medical care. You need one to rent most hotel rooms. You need one to rent a car. There are many things that require an ID. Why not voting?

I don’t have a problem with voter ID. Hell I live in a democratic state that has voter ID.

The issue is how access to ID’s is intentionally limited to discourage certain people from obtaining them.

Like when Alabama shut down DMV offices all over the state.

So no, it’s not the ID’s that are the issue, it’s how ID’s turn into political gamesmanship that is the issue.

Figure out a way to avoid the gamesmanship that assures that people can be identified at the polls via ID,and you have my unwavering support.

BS. Democrats don’t give a flying fig how easy or inexpensive it is to obtain a picture ID. They STILL oppose the concept because it severely limits their ability to defraud the voting system. They tried to make that claim when Pennsylvania was considering Voter ID by claiming that some 80+year-old woman couldn’t get one because she had no birth certificate. As soon as the state Supreme Court overruled the Democrats (the next DAY, in fact) she went to the DMV and got her picture ID for the massive sum of $1!


Then I guess I’m not a true democrat, huh? Go figure.

No, you are a blank check Democrat like my father who would have voted for Hitler if the Democrats had nominated him. He blamed a Republican Senator for ruining his business and hated the whole party. My grandmother was a George Wallace Democrat who opposed desegregation.

Mr father got his basic political orientation from her. Oddly enough, he became a civil rights liberal who thought that Hubert Humphrey was America’s greatest statesman. Still, when it came voting, it was one party for him.

We already have an ID that’s tied to our name, which is our social security number. Why we don’t just use that as an alternative option to photo ID is beyond me. You could even toss on a “plus a bank or utility bill with your name on it” on top of it. That’s basically the requirement to get your driver’s license in the first place.

1 Like

That’s a great idea.

There are still some people without SSID’s, but the number is exceedingly small, plus as time moves on, the number of people without SSID’s will decrease

The solution would be to set a date in the past and anyone born before that date doesn’t need to have their SSID and will vote just as others vote in states without ID’s. Let’s say we use 1940 as the cut off.

That’s 15 million people who are exempt and the number is reduced ever year and 3 presidential elections from now that number would be less than 2 million and 5 election from now the number is less than 20k.