I have another thread going about what the NC GOP is doing to destroy democracy in North Carolina. Turns out the Democrats are pulling some dirty tricks as well. The issue is the Green Party is trying to get their nominee, Matthew Hoh, onto the ballot for the senate race. Under NC law, a candidate needs 14,000 signatures to qualify for the ballot. The Green Party turned in 22,000 signatures, and of those, County Officials certified more than 16,000. However, using the excuse of "Fraudulent signatures", an "investigation" was started and the elections board voted 3-2 to keep the Green Party off the ballot despite meeting all the requirements. All three votes were Democrats, and both no votes were republican. But it gets better. There have been actually recordings of Democratic operatives calling people who signed the ballot and then posing as Green Party officials to convince the signatories to remove their signatures. This is blatant fraud, and to pull dirty tricks like this is an insult to democracy.

Here is a news article on the story and then a couple of podcasts reporting on this story, which has flown under the radar of course with the establishment trying to cover for the democrats.

https://www.wfae.org/politics/2022-07-07/n-c-green-party-rejection-sparks-claims-of-unfair-undermining-by-national-democrats

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omwJ4b3uNOc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQWrJV1q0KU

Anyone who claims to be for democracy should be sickened by what is going on here.

So, again, when Republicans do it, no big deal, move along, nothing to see here. Democrats take a page from the Republican playbook and we should all be outraged and sickened. That about sums things up: okay for Republicans, not okay for Democrats.

Of course, the biggest difference is Republicans tried to throw out millions of LEGAL ballots, while Democrats simply question a petition. IIRC, Republicans threw out thousands of signatures in Florida because people were registering either Democrat or third party. But, again, that's fine because Republicans did it. If you weren't outraged then, you have no right to be outraged now.

It’s all politics, giving more reasons to stop giving them out power and money. They need to put on a severe diet.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

It’s all politics, giving more reasons to stop giving them out power and money. They need to put on a severe diet.

Take money out of politics. That is what a lot of progressive Democrats want and have wanted for a long time. More conservative Democrats just kinda push it off like it is no big deal. The younger progressives know it must happen.

seb146 wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

It’s all politics, giving more reasons to stop giving them out power and money. They need to put on a severe diet.

Take money out of politics. That is what a lot of progressive Democrats want and have wanted for a long t time. More conservative Democrats just kinda push it off like it is no big deal. The younger progressives know it must happen.

Absolutely, take away 50% of the Federal tax revenue and borrowing, shrink the size of the monstrosity and the 535 people in Congress wouldn’t have the power to hand out goodies to their favored friends. Shrink their powers down to a strict reading of Art I, Section 8 and they couldn’t threaten people with punishment for not doing their bidding. See how easy and efficient taking the real money out of politics would be.

Progressives want political contributions out of politics so they can disarm the competition and blackmail the private sector without opposition. NO resident politician, of either party, wants money out of politics, either campaign money or your tax dollars—it’s the only thing they have.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

seb146 wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

It’s all politics, giving more reasons to stop giving them out power and money. They need to put on a severe diet.

Take money out of politics. That is what a lot of progressive Democrats want and have wanted for a long t time. More conservative Democrats just kinda push it off like it is no big deal. The younger progressives know it must happen.

Absolutely, take away 50% of the Federal tax revenue and borrowing, shrink the size of the monstrosity and the 535 people in Congress wouldn’t have the power to hand out goodies to their favored friends. Shrink their powers down to a strict reading of Art I, Section 8 and they couldn’t threaten people with punishment for not doing their bidding. See how easy and efficient taking the real money out of politics would be.

Progressives want political contributions out of politics so they can disarm the competition and blackmail the private sector without opposition. NO resident politician, of either party, wants money out of politics, either campaign money or your tax dollars—it’s the only thing they have.

Get money out of politics and NRA and fossil fuel and big pharma will have no say in elections. House members will not have to start campaigning the second week of November after they just won an election. Blame Democrats and "liberals" all you want but the right wing extremist courts decided money is the best for free and fair elections.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Progressives want political contributions out of politics so they can disarm the competition and blackmail the private sector without opposition. NO resident politician, of either party, wants money out of politics, either campaign money or your tax dollars—it’s the only thing they have.

“Blackmail the private sector” Sure, it’s better to blackmail the citizens by accepting money from the private sector for their own benefits…..

apodino wrote:

There have been actually recordings of Democratic operatives calling people who signed the ballot and then posing as Green Party officials to convince the signatories to remove their signatures. This is blatant fraud, and to pull dirty tricks like this is an insult to democracy.

Lock 'em up! I think that too many are prepared to pervert democracy in America. Time to deter those people, whatever their political hue. The longer corruption in the electoral process is tolerated, the less credible American democracy will become.

The Democrats are doing this for a good reason, at least. With the election setup (first by the post, if I'm not mistaken), a Green candidate will simply ensure a GOP win. Is it democracy if the majority is left wing but the right wins in that case ?

If the election could be over 2 turns like is the case in some places, or with jungle primaries, things like that, it would be much less of an issue.

Aesma wrote:

The Democrats are doing this for a good reason, at least. With the election setup (first by the post, if I'm not mistaken), a Green candidate will simply ensure a GOP win. Is it democracy if the majority is left wing but the right wins in that case ?

If the election could be over 2 turns like is the case in some places, or with jungle primaries, things like that, it would be much less of an issue.

As much as I want to see every single Republican voted out and thrown in jail, this is too much of an "ends justifies the means" argument. I don't want to see anyone unfairly kicked off the ballot, even if the outcome might be detrimental. It's rotten when Republicans cheat to win, but Dems should run on ideas and give voters a reason to vote for them, not pull dirty tricks and claim to be better than Republicans.

Here is more on what is occurring.

The green party lost status after failing to obtain sufficient numbers of votes in 2020 elections, and their signature sheets wreak of fraud. That 2 republican members actually voted for allowing it, is quite telling.

https://www.wral.com/green-party-left-o ... /20355241/

everal counties and staff members of the state elections board identified red flags, including signatures that appeared to be written by the same person, the indication that workers were paid for each signature obtained, voters on signature sheets who claimed they never signed the petition, and a number of deceased voters or individuals long removed from the voter rolls, according to the elections board.

State elections officials in 2018 recognized the Green Party as a political party, but the Green Party lost its recognition after failing to capture 2% of the vote in the 2020 presidential and gubernatorial general elections, causing former Green Party registrants to be moved to an unaffiliated status in 2021.

Aesma wrote:

The Democrats are doing this for a good reason, at least. With the election setup (first by the post, if I'm not mistaken), a Green candidate will simply ensure a GOP win. Is it democracy if the majority is left wing but the right wins in that case ?

If the election could be over 2 turns like is the case in some places, or with jungle primaries, things like that, it would be much less of an issue.

I don't think that dishonest and fraudulent manipulation of the electoral process with the intention of political gain is justifiable. Lock 'em up, I say again.

Our election system sucks. There should be a non-partisan primary where, if nobody gets above 50%, then the top 2 candidates go into a runoff.

casinterest wrote:

Here is more on what is occurring.

The green party lost status after failing to obtain sufficient numbers of votes in 2020 elections, and their signature sheets wreak of fraud. That 2 republican members actually voted for allowing it, is quite telling.

https://www.wral.com/green-party-left-o ... /20355241/

everal counties and staff members of the state elections board identified red flags, including signatures that appeared to be written by the same person, the indication that workers were paid for each signature obtained, voters on signature sheets who claimed they never signed the petition, and a number of deceased voters or individuals long removed from the voter rolls, according to the elections board.

State elections officials in 2018 recognized the Green Party as a political party, but the Green Party lost its recognition after failing to capture 2% of the vote in the 2020 presidential and gubernatorial general elections, causing former Green Party registrants to be moved to an unaffiliated status in 2021.

I gotta raise the BS flag on what is going on here. If the signatures were fradulent, why were democratic operatives calling the people who signed and trying to get them to recant, and why did these democratic operatives lie and say they were from the Green Party? If fraud was suspected, the proper move would have been to grant the access now, and if a fraud investigation pans out later, then you disqualify them from the Ballot. The fact that the Elections board is basically sentencing them without a conviction is very telling.

seb146 wrote:

So, again, when Republicans do it, no big deal, move along, nothing to see here. Democrats take a page from the Republican playbook and we should all be outraged and sickened. That about sums things up: okay for Republicans, not okay for Democrats.

Of course, the biggest difference is Republicans tried to throw out millions of LEGAL ballots, while Democrats simply question a petition. IIRC, Republicans threw out thousands of signatures in Florida because people were registering either Democrat or third party. But, again, that's fine because Republicans did it. If you weren't outraged then, you have no right to be outraged now.

This is always your go to argument Seb. Everytime the democrats do something bad you immediately trot out the argument that the GOP does it too. Let me tell you something. The GOP does do stuff like this and it is just as wrong when they do it as it is when the democrats do it. For whatever reason, even though I constantly criticize the GOP on here and cannot stand much of what the current party believes in, you seem to think that I am supporting the GOP when I criticize democrats and nothing is further from the truth. Nothing I post criticizing the democrats should ever be taken as saying its ok for the GOP to do it, and I wish you would stop suggesting otherwise.

That being said, as you say the GOP is clearly trying to maximize their voting base and minimize the democratic base and they do resort to dirty tricks to accomplish this. The difference between the GOP and the Democrats is when the GOP pulls dirty tricks, it is against the democrats, which is wrong and I in no way condone it. When the Democrats pull dirty tricks, it's never against the GOP, but against the Progressive Base. This is just the latest example. Other examples are the blatant homophobic smear campaign that the Dems ran against a Progressive trying to unseat corrupt Democrat Richie Neal, and the blatant smear ads that the democratic establishment took out against Nina Turner in an Ohio House race. Also, look at what happened on Super Tuesday last year. The establishment rigs Super Tuesday at the 11th hour, and as a result we are stuck with Joe Biden as president. I am glad Trump is out of office, but Biden aint much better as a replacement.

victrola wrote:

Our election system sucks. There should be a non-partisan primary where, if nobody gets above 50%, then the top 2 candidates go into a runoff.

Works in France (but primary is partisan). How can you have a non-partisan election in a system with political parties representing a whole spectrum of ideas?

apodino wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Here is more on what is occurring.

The green party lost status after failing to obtain sufficient numbers of votes in 2020 elections, and their signature sheets wreak of fraud. That 2 republican members actually voted for allowing it, is quite telling.

https://www.wral.com/green-party-left-o ... /20355241/

everal counties and staff members of the state elections board identified red flags, including signatures that appeared to be written by the same person, the indication that workers were paid for each signature obtained, voters on signature sheets who claimed they never signed the petition, and a number of deceased voters or individuals long removed from the voter rolls, according to the elections board.

State elections officials in 2018 recognized the Green Party as a political party, but the Green Party lost its recognition after failing to capture 2% of the vote in the 2020 presidential and gubernatorial general elections, causing former Green Party registrants to be moved to an unaffiliated status in 2021.

I gotta raise the BS flag on what is going on here. If the signatures were fradulent, why were democratic operatives calling the people who signed and trying to get them to recant, and why did these democratic operatives lie and say they were from the Green Party? If fraud was suspected, the proper move would have been to grant the access now, and if a fraud investigation pans out later, then you disqualify them from the Ballot. The fact that the Elections board is basically sentencing them without a conviction is very telling.
.

Not really.
Fraud is Fraud, and if the Green party wants to run, they can run unaffiliated. There are admissions of Fraud from the Green Party itself.

Mathew Hoh, the Green’s North Carolina U.S. Senate candidate, acknowledged there were small problems with the more than 22,000 signatures submitted.

Just look at the numbers

To get back on in 2022, the Greens needed 13,865 signatures of registered voters. The party said it collected 22,500 – and that local county elections boards verified 15,953 of them.

And even on the "verified" ones there are still questions. So yes on that small margin, I can see questions arising,

https://www.wfae.org/politics/2022-07-0 ... -democrats

At the end of the day, the Greens can do a better job verifying their signatures.

casinterest wrote:

apodino wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Here is more on what is occurring.

The green party lost status after failing to obtain sufficient numbers of votes in 2020 elections, and their signature sheets wreak of fraud. That 2 republican members actually voted for allowing it, is quite telling.

https://www.wral.com/green-party-left-o ... /20355241/

I gotta raise the BS flag on what is going on here. If the signatures were fradulent, why were democratic operatives calling the people who signed and trying to get them to recant, and why did these democratic operatives lie and say they were from the Green Party? If fraud was suspected, the proper move would have been to grant the access now, and if a fraud investigation pans out later, then you disqualify them from the Ballot. The fact that the Elections board is basically sentencing them without a conviction is very telling.
.

Not really.
Fraud is Fraud, and if the Green party wants to run, they can run unaffiliated. There are admissions of Fraud from the Green Party itself.

Mathew Hoh, the Green’s North Carolina U.S. Senate candidate, acknowledged there were small problems with the more than 22,000 signatures submitted.

Just look at the numbers

To get back on in 2022, the Greens needed 13,865 signatures of registered voters. The party said it collected 22,500 – and that local county elections boards verified 15,953 of them.

And even on the "verified" ones there are still questions. So yes on that small margin, I can see questions arising,

https://www.wfae.org/politics/2022-07-0 ... -democrats

At the end of the day, the Greens can do a better job verifying their signatures.

The Dems and Reps encounter similar issues with signature drives, so seems like BS to hold the Green Party to an arbitrarily higher standard…pretty transparent attempt to keep additional parties off the ballot.

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

apodino wrote:

I gotta raise the BS flag on what is going on here. If the signatures were fradulent, why were democratic operatives calling the people who signed and trying to get them to recant, and why did these democratic operatives lie and say they were from the Green Party? If fraud was suspected, the proper move would have been to grant the access now, and if a fraud investigation pans out later, then you disqualify them from the Ballot. The fact that the Elections board is basically sentencing them without a conviction is very telling.
.

Not really.
Fraud is Fraud, and if the Green party wants to run, they can run unaffiliated. There are admissions of Fraud from the Green Party itself.

Mathew Hoh, the Green’s North Carolina U.S. Senate candidate, acknowledged there were small problems with the more than 22,000 signatures submitted.

Just look at the numbers

To get back on in 2022, the Greens needed 13,865 signatures of registered voters. The party said it collected 22,500 – and that local county elections boards verified 15,953 of them.

And even on the "verified" ones there are still questions. So yes on that small margin, I can see questions arising,

https://www.wfae.org/politics/2022-07-0 ... -democrats

At the end of the day, the Greens can do a better job verifying their signatures.

The Dems and Reps encounter similar issues with signature drives, so seems like BS to hold the Green Party to an arbitrarily higher standard…pretty transparent attempt to keep additional parties off the ballot.

The Green party has a lot larger threshold to cross. Their numbers are barely above the required. There are issues I have with the local county board members verifying the votes, and then going back and finding issues, but they are raising the flags, so while the investigation is ongoing, I think the Green party needs to be on hold. They can still vote.

casinterest wrote:

The Green party has a lot larger threshold to cross. Their numbers are barely above the required. There are issues I have with the local county board members verifying the votes, and then going back and finding issues, but they are raising the flags, so while the investigation is ongoing, I think the Green party needs to be on hold. They can still vote.

Why? They met the vote threshold even after contested signatures were tossed. The issue at hand is allowing an additional party to offer a candidate for election on the ballot, not voter registration or voter fraud…what are the Dems afraid of?

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

The Green party has a lot larger threshold to cross. Their numbers are barely above the required. There are issues I have with the local county board members verifying the votes, and then going back and finding issues, but they are raising the flags, so while the investigation is ongoing, I think the Green party needs to be on hold. They can still vote.

Why? They met the vote threshold even after contested signatures were tossed. The issue at hand is allowing an additional party to offer a candidate for election on the ballot, not voter registration or voter fraud…what are the Dems afraid of?

The Dems aren't afraid of anything. They had people notice irregularities and are actually investigating them. Why did the Republicans vote to allow fraud, since it has been their mantra about signatures and bs since 2020? Seems like the Republicans can't even hold up their own "morals" about fraud investigation.

If the signatures clear out, then the Green's are allowed onto the vote. No big deal.

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

The Green party has a lot larger threshold to cross. Their numbers are barely above the required. There are issues I have with the local county board members verifying the votes, and then going back and finding issues, but they are raising the flags, so while the investigation is ongoing, I think the Green party needs to be on hold. They can still vote.

Why? They met the vote threshold even after contested signatures were tossed. The issue at hand is allowing an additional party to offer a candidate for election on the ballot, not voter registration or voter fraud…what are the Dems afraid of?

The Dems aren't afraid of anything. They had people notice irregularities and are actually investigating them.

And in the process conveniently keeping another party off the ballot. The fact that not all the signatures turned in ended up being validated is not in itself a red flag and has been a fixture of signature drives by both Dems and Reps. To keep an entire party off the ballot for it despite the signature threshold still being met is pure partisanship.

casinterest wrote:

Why did the Republicans vote to allow fraud, since it has been their mantra about signatures and bs since 2020?

Because it’s a partisan issue…which is exactly what most of us have been pointing out about this.

casinterest wrote:

If the signatures clear out, then the Green's are allowed onto the vote. No big deal.

No big deal except an entire political party being blocked from ballot access. Sure.

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

Why? They met the vote threshold even after contested signatures were tossed. The issue at hand is allowing an additional party to offer a candidate for election on the ballot, not voter registration or voter fraud…what are the Dems afraid of?

The Dems aren't afraid of anything. They had people notice irregularities and are actually investigating them.

And in the process conveniently keeping another party off the ballot. The fact that not all the signatures turned in ended up being validated is not in itself a red flag and has been a fixture of signature drives by both Dems and Reps. To keep an entire party off the ballot for it despite the signature threshold still being met is pure partisanship.

casinterest wrote:

Why did the Republicans vote to allow fraud, since it has been their mantra about signatures and bs since 2020?

Because it’s a partisan issue…which is exactly what most of us have been pointing out about this.

casinterest wrote:

If the signatures clear out, then the Green's are allowed onto the vote. No big deal.

No big deal except an entire political party being blocked from ballot access. Sure.

Well, you are not on the board, and they had to make a decision based on fraud. The Republicans couldn't even find it on them to actually investigate real fraud.
This isn't partisan,
this is a case of 22.500 signatures where only 70% were verified, and then the local counties and state committees raised issues with the remaining ballots and decided to investigate further,.

if they find nothing, then the green party will be on the ballot in the future.
However with that big of an issue in the initial count, you have to imagine there is margin for error in the remaining numbers to cause issues within the error threshold of the count.

Math isn't partisan. Just the GOP.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/ ... 36028.html

The Green Party is suing the board.
The board is waiting for counties to finish their directed reinvestigation on July 29th,
The Green party still missed the candidate filing deadline of July1.

he state board met again on Thursday and gave an update on its investigation into the Green Party’s petition campaign. Executive Director Karen Brinson Bell said that the state board learned that several county boards had not properly checked signatures and have now been directed to do so by July 29, which could alter the total signature count. This deadline would allow the board to determine whether the party has enough valid signatures to be certified before the state board prints ballots, Bell said. The board’s Republican members, Stacy “Four” Eggers IV and Tommy Tucker, pointed out that even if the party were certified by the end of the month, the July 1 deadline for filing its candidates has already passed. The state board’s spokesperson, Pat Gannon, confirmed that the only way the Green Party could appear on the ballot this November would be by a court order or by action from the General Assembly.

Read more at: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/ ... rylink=cpy

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

The Dems aren't afraid of anything. They had people notice irregularities and are actually investigating them.

And in the process conveniently keeping another party off the ballot. The fact that not all the signatures turned in ended up being validated is not in itself a red flag and has been a fixture of signature drives by both Dems and Reps. To keep an entire party off the ballot for it despite the signature threshold still being met is pure partisanship.

casinterest wrote:

Why did the Republicans vote to allow fraud, since it has been their mantra about signatures and bs since 2020?

Because it’s a partisan issue…which is exactly what most of us have been pointing out about this.

casinterest wrote:

If the signatures clear out, then the Green's are allowed onto the vote. No big deal.

No big deal except an entire political party being blocked from ballot access. Sure.

Well, you are not on the board, and they had to make a decision based on fraud. The Republicans couldn't even find it on them to actually investigate real fraud.
This isn't partisan,
this is a case of 22.500 signatures where only 70% were verified, and then the local counties and state committees raised issues with the remaining ballots and decided to investigate further,.

if they find nothing, then the green party will be on the ballot in the future.
However with that big of an issue in the initial count, you have to imagine there is margin for error in the remaining numbers to cause issues within the error threshold of the count.

Math isn't partisan. Just the GOP.

Lol this isn’t about math, just typical nakedly partisan behavior by the two established political parties to keep competing parties off the ballot and limiting voter choice. You’re obfuscating hard.

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

And in the process conveniently keeping another party off the ballot. The fact that not all the signatures turned in ended up being validated is not in itself a red flag and has been a fixture of signature drives by both Dems and Reps. To keep an entire party off the ballot for it despite the signature threshold still being met is pure partisanship.


Because it’s a partisan issue…which is exactly what most of us have been pointing out about this.


No big deal except an entire political party being blocked from ballot access. Sure.

Well, you are not on the board, and they had to make a decision based on fraud. The Republicans couldn't even find it on them to actually investigate real fraud.
This isn't partisan,
this is a case of 22.500 signatures where only 70% were verified, and then the local counties and state committees raised issues with the remaining ballots and decided to investigate further,.

if they find nothing, then the green party will be on the ballot in the future.
However with that big of an issue in the initial count, you have to imagine there is margin for error in the remaining numbers to cause issues within the error threshold of the count.

Math isn't partisan. Just the GOP.

Lol this isn’t about math, just typical nakedly partisan behavior by the two established political parties to keep competing parties off the ballot and limiting voter choice. You’re obfuscating hard.

No, I just actually read the articles instead of baking partisanship in.

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Well, you are not on the board, and they had to make a decision based on fraud. The Republicans couldn't even find it on them to actually investigate real fraud.
This isn't partisan,
this is a case of 22.500 signatures where only 70% were verified, and then the local counties and state committees raised issues with the remaining ballots and decided to investigate further,.

if they find nothing, then the green party will be on the ballot in the future.
However with that big of an issue in the initial count, you have to imagine there is margin for error in the remaining numbers to cause issues within the error threshold of the count.

Math isn't partisan. Just the GOP.

Lol this isn’t about math, just typical nakedly partisan behavior by the two established political parties to keep competing parties off the ballot and limiting voter choice. You’re obfuscating hard.

No, I just actually read the articles instead of baking partisanship in.

As have I. Establishment parties lying to petitioners in order to mislead them to revoke their signatures ain’t a good look.

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

Lol this isn’t about math, just typical nakedly partisan behavior by the two established political parties to keep competing parties off the ballot and limiting voter choice. You’re obfuscating hard.

No, I just actually read the articles instead of baking partisanship in.

As have I. Establishment parties lying to petitioners in order to mislead them to revoke their signatures ain’t a good look.

Did you actually read anything previously?

The counties themselves failed to properly check the signatures and found high irregularities for which there is a July 29 deadline of investigation.

If the Green party was actually an organized political party, you would think they would have been ahead of the game instead of submitting so close to the deadlines.

casinterest wrote:

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article263436028.html

The Green Party is suing the board.
The board is waiting for counties to finish their directed reinvestigation on July 29th,
The Green party still missed the candidate filing deadline of July1.

he state board met again on Thursday and gave an update on its investigation into the Green Party’s petition campaign. Executive Director Karen Brinson Bell said that the state board learned that several county boards had not properly checked signatures and have now been directed to do so by July 29, which could alter the total signature count. This deadline would allow the board to determine whether the party has enough valid signatures to be certified before the state board prints ballots, Bell said. The board’s Republican members, Stacy “Four” Eggers IV and Tommy Tucker, pointed out that even if the party were certified by the end of the month, the July 1 deadline for filing its candidates has already passed. The state board’s spokesperson, Pat Gannon, confirmed that the only way the Green Party could appear on the ballot this November would be by a court order or by action from the General Assembly.

Read more at: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/ ... rylink=cpy

This has implications beyond just the 2022 elections. Presumably the Green Party would like to run their 2024 presidential candidate on the North Carolina ballot also? It would allow voters to register with the party as well.

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

No, I just actually read the articles instead of baking partisanship in.

As have I. Establishment parties lying to petitioners in order to mislead them to revoke their signatures ain’t a good look.

Did you actually read anything previously?

The counties themselves failed to properly check the signatures and found high irregularities for which there is a July 29 deadline of investigation.

If the Green party was actually an organized political party, you would think they would have been ahead of the game instead of submitting so close to the deadlines.

And? How is that the Green Party’s fault? They submitted their petition months ago. So convenient for the established parties to drag their feet for months giving their political committees adequate time to misleadingly call petitioners to recall their signatures.

And to be clear again, the Green Party filed their petition months ago back in May, and the state board validated the signatures at the end of May…but of course only days before the filing deadline do they vote not to certify in favor of a month-long investigation that they had ample time previously to conduct, which will just so happen to keep them off the ballot for another election. Come on

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article263436028.html

The Green Party is suing the board.
The board is waiting for counties to finish their directed reinvestigation on July 29th,
The Green party still missed the candidate filing deadline of July1.

he state board met again on Thursday and gave an update on its investigation into the Green Party’s petition campaign. Executive Director Karen Brinson Bell said that the state board learned that several county boards had not properly checked signatures and have now been directed to do so by July 29, which could alter the total signature count. This deadline would allow the board to determine whether the party has enough valid signatures to be certified before the state board prints ballots, Bell said. The board’s Republican members, Stacy “Four” Eggers IV and Tommy Tucker, pointed out that even if the party were certified by the end of the month, the July 1 deadline for filing its candidates has already passed. The state board’s spokesperson, Pat Gannon, confirmed that the only way the Green Party could appear on the ballot this November would be by a court order or by action from the General Assembly.

Read more at: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/ ... rylink=cpy

This has implications beyond just the 2022 elections. Presumably the Green Party would like to run their 2024 presidential candidate on the North Carolina ballot also? It would allow voters to register with the party as well.

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

As have I. Establishment parties lying to petitioners in order to mislead them to revoke their signatures ain’t a good look.

Did you actually read anything previously?

The counties themselves failed to properly check the signatures and found high irregularities for which there is a July 29 deadline of investigation.

If the Green party was actually an organized political party, you would think they would have been ahead of the game instead of submitting so close to the deadlines.

And? How is that the Green Party’s fault? They submitted their petition months ago. So convenient for the established parties to drag their feet for months giving their political committees adequate time to misleadingly call petitioners to recall their signatures.

And to be clear again, the Green Party filed their petition months ago back in May, and the state board validated the signatures at the end of May…but of course they then conveniently vote for a month-long investigation and not to certify just days prior to the candidate filing deadline. They validated the signatures once and had ample time to investigate further earlier in the year. Come on

Sorry you don't actually believe in investigating fraud. The issues being investigated include the fact that the county boards didn't follow procedures established for verifying the signatures. So the certifications of those counties are moot in terms of authenticity. A court may decide to err on the side of the Green party, but that is a court matter. The state board asked the county boards to actually do their jobs when the below irregularities were pointed out.

Numerous fake signatures on petition pages, “indicating an organized effort to falsify signatures.”
38 individuals who contacted a single county board of elections stating they did not sign the petition in which their names were listed.
Among a sample of voters listed on pages gathered by a subject in the criminal investigation, an overwhelming ratio of such voters told state investigators they did not sign versus those who said they did.
The Green Party and a presumed candidate hired individuals who submitted false signatures and were paid by the signature. These individuals, who collected thousands of signatures, have not cooperated with the investigation, thus investigators do not know exactly how many false signatures were submitted.
Same handwriting throughout many pages.
Numerous lines with incomplete information, or where the name, address, or date of birth was crossed out.
Duplicate voters.
Partial dates of birth.

https://www.witn.com/2022/07/14/investi ... elections/

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article263436028.html

The Green Party is suing the board.
The board is waiting for counties to finish their directed reinvestigation on July 29th,
The Green party still missed the candidate filing deadline of July1.

This has implications beyond just the 2022 elections. Presumably the Green Party would like to run their 2024 presidential candidate on the North Carolina ballot also? It would allow voters to register with the party as well.

casinterest wrote:

Did you actually read anything previously?

The counties themselves failed to properly check the signatures and found high irregularities for which there is a July 29 deadline of investigation.

If the Green party was actually an organized political party, you would think they would have been ahead of the game instead of submitting so close to the deadlines.

And? How is that the Green Party’s fault? They submitted their petition months ago. So convenient for the established parties to drag their feet for months giving their political committees adequate time to misleadingly call petitioners to recall their signatures.

And to be clear again, the Green Party filed their petition months ago back in May, and the state board validated the signatures at the end of May…but of course they then conveniently vote for a month-long investigation and not to certify just days prior to the candidate filing deadline. They validated the signatures once and had ample time to investigate further earlier in the year. Come on

Sorry you don't actually believe in investigating fraud.

They had more than adequate lead time to vet and investigate and they sat on it until they could ensure they wouldn’t make it on the ballot in time. That’s the problem. It’s the same playbook over and over and over again with the establishment and third parties.

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

This has implications beyond just the 2022 elections. Presumably the Green Party would like to run their 2024 presidential candidate on the North Carolina ballot also? It would allow voters to register with the party as well.


And? How is that the Green Party’s fault? They submitted their petition months ago. So convenient for the established parties to drag their feet for months giving their political committees adequate time to misleadingly call petitioners to recall their signatures.

And to be clear again, the Green Party filed their petition months ago back in May, and the state board validated the signatures at the end of May…but of course they then conveniently vote for a month-long investigation and not to certify just days prior to the candidate filing deadline. They validated the signatures once and had ample time to investigate further earlier in the year. Come on

Sorry you don't actually believe in investigating fraud.

They had more than adequate lead time to vet and investigate and they say on it until they could ensure they wouldn’t make it on the ballot in time. That’s the problem.

No the problem is fraudulent signatures. Those need to be investigated.
The Green party has been delaying the investigation because those that submitted the signatures aren't cooperating.

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Sorry you don't actually believe in investigating fraud.

They had more than adequate lead time to vet and investigate and they say on it until they could ensure they wouldn’t make it on the ballot in time. That’s the problem.

No the problem is fraudulent signatures. Those need to be investigated.

And they could have been investigated in the two months that the Board of Elections had them in hand…but again, they sat on it.

flyguy89 wrote:

They had more than adequate lead time to vet and investigate and they sat on it until they could ensure they wouldn’t make it on the ballot in time. That’s the problem. It’s the same playbook over and over and over again with the establishment and third parties.

To clarify, the North Carolina Board did launch their investigation in May, asking County boards to validate signatures from their areas. That was submitted by the last week of June, so roughly a month's time from the May 17 deadline.

County boards are required to validate the submitted signatures within 2 weeks after submission, which would be around the first week of June. But the boards alerted the state of irregularities, and asked for more time to investigate, which was granted. The issues are so numerous that the work is ongoing. It requires confirmation with some signatories.

The result was that the Green Party had exceeded the minimum by 2,000 signatures, but more than 2,000 are suspect. In one case, the signatures from a paid gatherer were less than 50% validated.

Here is the presentation by the board:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/dl.ncsbe.gov/S ... FINAL.pptx

Here is the page from their web site:

https://www.ncsbe.gov/news/press-releas ... ecognition

The Board had proposed legislation making it illegal to pay gatherers by the signature, as it is also illegal to pay by the voter for registration.

Avatar2go wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

They had more than adequate lead time to vet and investigate and they sat on it until they could ensure they wouldn’t make it on the ballot in time. That’s the problem. It’s the same playbook over and over and over again with the establishment and third parties.

To clarify, the North Carolina Board did launch their investigation in May, asking County boards to validate signatures from their areas. That was concluded by the last week of June, so roughly a month's time.

County boards are required to validate the submitted signatures within 2 weeks after submission, which would be around June 2. But the boards alerted the state of irregularities, and asked for more time to investigate, which was granted. The issues are so numerous that the work is ongoing.

The result was that the Green Party had exceeded the minimum by 2,000 signatures, but more than 2,000 are suspect. In one case, the signatures from a paid gatherer were less than 50% validated.

Here is the presentation by the board:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/dl.ncsbe.gov/S ... FINAL.pptx

Here is the page from their web site:

https://www.ncsbe.gov/news/press-releas ... ecognition

The Board had proposed legislation making it illegal to pay gatherers by the signature, as it is also illegal to pay by the voter for registration.

The Board had completed the verification process by the end of May. They had a month from there to investigate further and certify a final petition signature tally.

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

They had more than adequate lead time to vet and investigate and they say on it until they could ensure they wouldn’t make it on the ballot in time. That’s the problem.

No the problem is fraudulent signatures. Those need to be investigated.

And they could have been investigated in the two months that the Board of Elections had them in hand…but again, they sat on it.

No. Those would be the non partisan county commissions.

flyguy89 wrote:

The Board had completed the verification process by the end of May. They had a month from there to investigate further and certify a final petition signature tally.

No, that is incorrect. The State Board continued to receive signatory sheets from the County boards, until the last week of June. This is in their presentation.

It's likely now that somewhere around half the signatures will be rejected. They submitted 22,000, of which only 15,000 were validated on the first pass (registered voters). Several thousand of those are still under scrutiny.

There is no conspiracy here. The truth is that there were so many irregularities, that it wasn't possible to establish an exact count by the July 1 deadline. So if they did not decline the petition, they would have needed legislation or a court order to allow participation. Even the Republicans pointed this out.

The Green Party might have been willing to seek that order, if the count was confirmed in their favor. But it wasn't likely. If you can't submit a petition that can pass validation in a month, then there is justification to dismiss. Note that the Green Party has now sought that order, as well as an overturning of the Board ruling.

The State Board has said they are willing to allow the petition, if the Court agrees, if a valid count is confirmed, and if this occurs before the mid-August ballot printing deadline.

Avatar2go wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

The Board had completed the verification process by the end of May. They had a month from there to investigate further and certify a final petition signature tally.

No, that is incorrect. The State Board continued to receive signatory sheets from the County boards, until the last week of June. This is in their presentation.

The physical sheets? Perhaps. They had the verified signature counts at the end of May however, and purportedly were vetting irregularities flagged as early as May 13.

Your presentation link is broken FYI.

flyguy89 wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

The Board had completed the verification process by the end of May. They had a month from there to investigate further and certify a final petition signature tally.

No, that is incorrect. The State Board continued to receive signatory sheets from the County boards, until the last week of June. This is in their presentation.

The physical sheets? Perhaps. They had the verified signature counts at the end of May however, and purportedly were vetting irregularities flagged as early as May 13.

Your presentation link is broken FYI.

Your timeline is wrong, the County Boards had the 22,000 signatures by the May 17th deadline, and by the 2 week review deadline, had validated more than 15,000 as registered voters. But reported numerous irregularities which began the investigation into the signatures. That went on for 3 - 4 weeks before the June 1 decision deadline. That investigation continues as the voters have to be contacted to confirm their participation, if their signatures don't match their voter registration cards.

Apparently the Google key is needed for the link to work.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... HJkpwnUEbg

Good! This country is a bad enough cluster fuck with TWO parties....image what it would be like with....well, like France....

Avatar2go wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

No, that is incorrect. The State Board continued to receive signatory sheets from the County boards, until the last week of June. This is in their presentation.

The physical sheets? Perhaps. They had the verified signature counts at the end of May however, and purportedly were vetting irregularities flagged as early as May 13.

Your presentation link is broken FYI.

Your timeline is wrong, the County Boards had the 22,000 signatures by the May 17th deadline, and by the 2 week review deadline, had validated more than 15,000 as registered voters. But reported numerous irregularities which began the investigation into the signatures. That went on for 3 - 4 weeks before the June 1 decision deadline. That investigation continues as the voters have to be contacted to confirm their participation, if their signatures don't match their voter registration cards.

Apparently the Google key is needed for the link to work.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... HJkpwnUEbg

I don't see anything there that contradicts the timeline. The state board themselves said they've been investigating since May 13:

Between April and June, several county boards reported irregularities to the state board, prompting it to open an official investigation on May 13 — before the complaints from the Elias Group were submitted.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/polit ... 16143.html

They had a month and a half to probe, reject, and weed out fraudulent signatures

flyguy89 wrote:

I don't see anything there that contradicts the timeline. The state board themselves said they've been investigating since May 13:

Between April and June, several county boards reported irregularities to the state board, prompting it to open an official investigation on May 13 — before the complaints from the Elias Group were submitted.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/polit ... 16143.html

They had a month and a half to probe, reject, and weed out fraudulent signatures

To clarify, the first irregularities were reported and investigation opened on May 13th. The County boards have two weeks from the May 17th deadline to validate the results, but were unable to do so because of the number of irregularities. Thus they continued to report results right up to the last week of June. This is in the presentation, as I mentioned.

Your premise is that the board sat from May 13th on the investigation and did nothing, but they cannot review materials until handed to them by the counties, who in normal circumstances, require 2 weeks. In this case, more. Then they need assistance from the counties to run them down.

We aren't talking about a hundred irregularities, we're talking about thousands, from 1/3 to 1/2 of the 22,000 submitted. It takes time to do that and they are still not finished.

I get that it helps your case to say they did nothing and it's all political. But just not reasonable or factual to say that, in the face of the number of signatures, and the number of irregularities.

If you look at the evidence the board presented, it's clear that some of the paid gatherers were filling out the pages themselves, from the voter registration rolls. Some of them, up to 50% of the signatures they gathered. That level of fraud has to be investigated, and that takes time.

Avatar2go wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

I don't see anything there that contradicts the timeline. The state board themselves said they've been investigating since May 13:

Between April and June, several county boards reported irregularities to the state board, prompting it to open an official investigation on May 13 — before the complaints from the Elias Group were submitted.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/polit ... 16143.html

They had a month and a half to probe, reject, and weed out fraudulent signatures

To clarify, the first irregularities were reported and investigation opened on May 13th. The County boards have two weeks from the May 17th deadline to validate the results, but were unable to do so because of the number of irregularities. Thus they continued to report results right up to the last week of June. This is in the presentation, as I mentioned.

Your premise is that the board sat from May 13th on the investigation and did nothing, but they cannot review materials until handed to them by the counties, who in normal circumstances, require 2 weeks. In this case, more. Then they need assistance from the counties to run them down.

We aren't talking about a hundred irregularities, we're talking about thousands, from 1/3 to 1/2 of the 22,000 submitted. It takes time to do that and they are still not finished.

I get that it helps your case to say they did nothing and it's all political. But just not reasonable or factual to say that, in the face of the number of signatures, and the number of irregularities.

If you look at the evidence the board presented, it's clear that some of the paid gatherers were filling out the pages themselves, from the voter registration rolls. Some of them, up to 50% of the signatures they gathered. That level of fraud has to be investigated, and that takes time.

In the mean time, blame Democrats. Investigations are going on? Who cares. Blame Democrats!

seb146 wrote:

In the mean time, blame Democrats. Investigations are going on? Who cares. Blame Democrats!

The frustrating thing is the constant belief in conspiracy. When there is no evidence of election fraud, there really is and it's a conspiracy. When there is evidence of election fraud, there really isn't and it's a conspiracy.

Always the pursuit of the conspiracy theory, instead of following the evidence. Trump has somehow managed to legitimize that pattern of thinking for a lot of people, who apparently want to believe.

seb146 wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

It’s all politics, giving more reasons to stop giving them out power and money. They need to put on a severe diet.

Take money out of politics. That is what a lot of progressive Democrats want and have wanted for a long time. More conservative Democrats just kinda push it off like it is no big deal. The younger progressives know it must happen.

Injecting the government’s own money into politics would be insane…. It certainly would not be “taking money out of” the political process. Progressive politicians’ main goals are to greatly increase the funding to themselves and their causes, by trillions of dollars.

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Sorry you don't actually believe in investigating fraud.

They had more than adequate lead time to vet and investigate and they say on it until they could ensure they wouldn’t make it on the ballot in time. That’s the problem.

No the problem is fraudulent signatures. Those need to be investigated.
The Green party has been delaying the investigation because those that submitted the signatures aren't cooperating.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but its not so much fraudulent signatures as it is invalid signatures. I think the signers have to be registered voters and the signature matches the signature on the registration, right? Is it someone's fault when doing a signature drive if they are asking if a person is registered to vote and they lie?

bpatus297 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

No the problem is fraudulent signatures. Those need to be investigated.
The Green party has been delaying the investigation because those that submitted the signatures aren't cooperating.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but its not so much fraudulent signatures as it is invalid signatures. I think the signers have to be registered voters and the signature matches the signature on the registration, right? Is it someone's fault when doing a signature drive if they are asking if a person is registered to vote and they lie?

A large fraction of the signees were removed for cause, of not being registered. The gatherers do have access to the registration rolls, and have at least some ability to vet registration on their own. They do not have access to the signature records, so cannot identify the signatures as authentic.

That is done by the county boards, and that is where the potential for fraud comes in. If there are substantial numbers of inauthentic signatures, that means that others are filling out the petitions. Further if the inauthentic signatures are all the same, that indicates that a specific person is filling them out.

The board found extensive instances of this in the petitions, and under the law, that is a fraudulent activity. They will be looking to see if the gatherers match the handwriting and signature patterns. But they are probably smart enough to have that done by others than themselves.

bpatus297 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

They had more than adequate lead time to vet and investigate and they say on it until they could ensure they wouldn’t make it on the ballot in time. That’s the problem.

No the problem is fraudulent signatures. Those need to be investigated.
The Green party has been delaying the investigation because those that submitted the signatures aren't cooperating.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but its not so much fraudulent signatures as it is invalid signatures. I think the signers have to be registered voters and the signature matches the signature on the registration, right? Is it someone's fault when doing a signature drive if they are asking if a person is registered to vote and they lie?

There are a lot of signatures signed by the same handwriting, and incomplete data. So the data itself is bad. If a person lies to a signature drive person that doesn't really matter. The County boards should do the verification of the signatures.

art wrote:

victrola wrote:

Our election system sucks. There should be a non-partisan primary where, if nobody gets above 50%, then the top 2 candidates go into a runoff.

Works in France (but primary is partisan). How can you have a non-partisan election in a system with political parties representing a whole spectrum of ideas?

The first round in France is not partisan. In the first round you usually have several candidates from different political parties. Every voter in France is able to vote for any candidate in the first round. Usually nobody gets 50%+1 and so the top 2 candidates go to the second round.

It is very easy to have a non-partisan primary. California already does this. No matter what party you are a member of in California, you get to choose from all of the candidates on the ballot in the primary as opposed to other states where Democrats vote in a Democratic primary and Republicans vote in a Republican primary.

Avatar2go wrote:

seb146 wrote:

In the mean time, blame Democrats. Investigations are going on? Who cares. Blame Democrats!

The frustrating thing is the constant belief in conspiracy. When there is no evidence of election fraud, there really is and it's a conspiracy. When there is evidence of election fraud, there really isn't and it's a conspiracy.

Always the pursuit of the conspiracy theory, instead of following the evidence. Trump has somehow managed to legitimize that pattern of thinking for a lot of people, who apparently want to believe.

Is it really election fraud when signatures to get a candidate on the ballot are being challenged? Republicans are doing the same thing by challenging voters on voter rolls all over the country. Why no outrage over that as well?

Election fraud is one person voting twice, usually for the same person. Which happened.... what... less than 475 times out of millions of ballots cast last election? Or millions, depending on what party you listen to.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/exhau ... e-lives-on
https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2103619118

seb146 wrote:

Is it really election fraud when signatures to get a candidate on the ballot are being challenged? Republicans are doing the same thing by challenging voters on voter rolls all over the country. Why no outrage over that as well?

Election fraud is one person voting twice, usually for the same person.

Signature fraud is a form of invalid signature. In North Carolina it's a Class 2 misdemeanor for the person who signs, and a Class 1 felony for the gatherer who swears on the collection.

You're correct that this is not election fraud in the sense of vote fraud. But it is a form of fraud related to the ballot.

Typically up to 25% of signatures are ruled invalid for petitions, so gatherers collect more than required. In this case the rate was closer to 50%, which is what triggered the investigation.

https://ballotpedia.org/Fraudulent_signature