this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023

264 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19097 readers

3122 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

outrageousmatter@lemmy.world

aidan@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

264

Woodbury County supervisor's wife found guilty of 52 counts of voter fraud (www.iowapublicradio.org)

submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Prosecutors say Kim Phuong Taylor wanted her husband to win elections in 2020 “by any means necessary.”

A jury spent about five hours deliberating before convicting Kim Phuong Taylor on 52 counts of voter fraud in federal court Tuesday in Sioux City. Taylor faces up to five years in prison on each count. A sentencing date hasn’t been set.

Prosecutors say Taylor took advantage of other Vietnamese immigrants by illegally filling out election forms and ballots. Her husband, Jeremy Taylor, lost a GOP primary for the U.S. House and won election to the Woodbury County Board of Supervisors in 2020.

...

Two Iowa State students, Tam and Thien Doan, took the stand and said that when they tried to file absentee ballots in Ames, they discovered someone had already cast a ballot in their names. They are Democrats, but their votes supported all Republican candidates, including former President Donald Trump. They were able to get new ballots in time for the general election.

all 48 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 118 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wow more conservatives committing voter fraud, shocking. The projection with these fuckers is astounding.

[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago

As the saying goes, every GOP accusation is really a confession.

[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago

No party listed in headline: guaranteed Republican.

[–] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 97 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Republican - This need to be the first word in first sentence of the title and every paragraph thereafter

[–] Davel23@kbin.social 27 points 1 year ago

I think it can just be assumed at this point.

[+] xenspidey@lemmy.zip -37 points 1 year ago (3 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] aegis_sum@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Give us one example.

[–] Vant@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago

They're feverishly googling "democrat voter fraud" but nothing solid is coming up so they're just going to ghost this comment and pretend it never happened.

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

last time I asked this someone replied with a guy who was a registered democrat (ie not a politician) who cheated himself into being the captain of the local soccer team.

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 months ago

Here are all the convictions between 2016 and 2020. Note that the breakdown between Republicans and Democrats are very close to the same with Republicans have a slight edge on convictions. https://the2020election.org/voter-fraud-convictions-since-2016/

[–] nkat2112@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago

This is a disingenuous comment.

[+] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Actually about 38:41 ratio. https://the2020election.org/voter-fraud-convictions-since-2016/

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

One that site looks sketchy as fuck. Two, even if it's right, convictions are not a magic view into everything that actually has happened. Three, that site is sketchy af

Edit: I just did some research myself and it looks like any respectable organization doesn't keep data about party affiliation in these cases. So I have to conclude your source is biased toward Republicans. I don't remember the last time I heard about a Democrat committing voter fraud, but I can easily recall many cases of Republicans doing it. And when I say many, I mean on a scale of memorability. This shit isn't happening often enough really to talk about and it's only notable because the people convinced it's an epidemic are the same ones actually committing the crime. Because like every other gop accusation, it's actually a confession

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You don't hear about it because it's not discussed as much. The internet is very left as a whole and they don't mention things that don't fit a narrative. Like your response. It sounds like that site took the information from here https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud. Party affiliation is public knowledge. Examples are not hard to find https://www.mycentraljersey.com/story/news/crime/2023/05/03/nj-election-fraud-democrat-governor/70174889007/

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So... You're aware that the heritage foundation is one of the most right wing lobby groups in history and somehow you still think this point stands?

The Internet is made up of people. "Leftist" ideas are actually really popular, it takes effort to try to unlearn the basic morality we are taught by every major religion and belief system and how it's supposedly totally different than how government is supposed to work

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This is one of the biggest problems we have on the internet. We only belive sources that align with our echo chamber. Why can't a conservative source be legit? You only believe things that are on left leaning sites then? That's pretty sad, you're missing a lot of nuance then. I'm a straight up centrist so maybe it's just easier for me to be unbiased and see where biases are. Sure leftist ideologies are gaining more ground, I'm not saying the right is the answer but it needs to lie somewhere in the middle.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

If you believe a single thing that the heritage foundation says, we got nothing to talk about

I will say it's fucking hilarious that you think you're unbiased, given that you just admitted to believing conservative billionaire propaganda

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Gathering a database of voter fraud is propaganda?!? Wow we are fucked as a society. Look at the database, I just picked one individual, googled the name, and bam. Here's the local report. https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2023/01/30/4th-resident-of-the-villages-admits-to-voting-twice-in-the-2020-election/

Just because you don't agree with a source, doesn't make it wrong.

It doesn't matter the source, verifiable facts are still facts

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

don't agree with a source

See the pesky thing about facts is that they aren't dependent on "agreement".

The source of information being awful matters. Your type loves to think you're open minded and no one else is. I have been through decades of giving anyone related to Republicans a chance. I gave them way too many actually. Spreading lies on the Internet is actually a terrible thing to do. It doesn't make you superior which is what you seem to think it does. Your sources are basically Fox News. 🤢

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

See the pesky thing about facts is that they aren't dependent on "agreement".

Exactly, the souce itself does not make facts, not facts. Well I'm not a republican. I'm sorry that you are unable to objectively look at things.

So since I posted a link to a site that you don't like, that has verifiable facts, that's me spreading lies on the internet? I do not believe I'm superior at all, I was mainly stating that voter fraud, when it rarely happens in the scheme of things, happens on both sides of the isle. That's it.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Dude, you're obviously a Republican. The heritage foundation is well known as a right wing think tank. You are spreading lies, and I expect it's intentional

If you were interested in the truth, you'd be most concerned with the vErIfIeD FaCtS meaning you'd be focused on the fact that voter fraud barely exists, instead of pretending it's not usually republicans doing it and "coincidentally" the only ones who care about it.

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I searched Google for voter fraud database and that's what came up, simple as that. I looked through the database, searched a couple of the names, the local reports from local news outlets came up. Thus verifiable... Yes voter fraud barely exists, there were what, 1400 cases from 2016 - 2020 in that database. That's miniscule. I was only stating that in the rare cases it does happen, it happens on both sides. I didn't say it's not usually Republicans either, I believe someone stated 50:1 in that thread. I merely stated that it was closer to 43:37 in reality. So the 50:1 comment is trying to pass off lies but you don't care about that. You in fact do not care about facts unless those facts come from sources within your echo chamber. Take a step back and look at things objectively and put biases aside.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

"put your biases aside"

a person who puts any stock whatsoever in the heritage foundation

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Holy hell, I used it for a database. How can a factual database have a bias. You really are something else

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I was once stubbornly a BoTh SiDeS-er too. I was between 17-22 then. When I actually learned enough to see the reliable fact patterns, I wised up. I hope you do as well. Because you're looking about like a Republican shill at the moment.

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I still don't understand how pointing to a database, and agreeing with the sentiments put forth about how voter fraud is not a real issue, is a republican shill? If I was stating the there was an issue that's another thing. It's funny I've noticed the fact patterns too, and I've realized that both sides always show biases and you have to look through all that. If you believe only one side is telling the truth, you are very delusional. Both sides report as if the other is lying, you can't tell me that one side is always right, if so I don't believe you are much older then 22. Very nieve.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The source of information matters and I think you know that... There's nothing to argue about here

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

How does that make sense? So if two sites reported on the same football scores, one matters more perhaps because of who may own the site?! Are you serious? Reporting of stories will always vary based on news source, that's a given. No news source is unbiased. But when you are reporting just the facts obtained from criminal records, source doesn't matter because the source is the criminal records. Good grief you're dense. Next time you read a major news article check it out on allsides.com see how the right left and center are reporting on it. Maybe you'll be able to understand the nuance. Now you won't do that because you don't want objective truth, you want your teams spin and that is it. That's the beauty of not having a team, no blinders.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Give it a fucking rest. You aren't open minded or superior. You're gullible and inexperienced

[–] xenspidey@lemmy.zip -1 points 11 months ago

Here's an example, my reply and our conversation is hidden in the comment section. Can't have any dissent from the narrative

[–] CharlesReed@kbin.social 40 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Just yesterday my parents were complaining about "cheating" on Election Day by Democrats. I'm half tempted to send them this.

[–] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

Do it. Thanksgiving dinner ain’t gonna entertain itself.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Do it. Ask not what thanksgiving drama can do for you but what you can do to cause thanksgiving drama

[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

Send them this to really get the turkey rolling.

[+] nutsack@lemmy.world -7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

don't do it. anecdotal one off cases are not meaningful. discussions about them are really annoying. they don't go anywhere

[–] ElderWendigo@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's absolutely not an isolated case. It's enough of a trend that I'd argue it's no longer simply anecdotal anymore either. Political discussions with family are almost always unproductive and annoying, but I don't see how silence benefits anyone by the fascists.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the anecdote doesn't show how it's an inherent problem. you need to demonstrate that in some other way. you don't have to be silent you just have to not suck at arguing

[–] ElderWendigo@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, one anecdote doesn't. But, as I just said, this is hardly an isolated incident. Several election fraud cases have made news in the last few years and all of them have been Republicans. Maybe you just suck at reading comprehension. Maybe you just don't pay attention to the news. Maybe you're the kind that thinks if they just totally ignore the points that other people make and repeat themselves louder until the other side shuts up that they've somehow "won" the argument.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago

haha. yea good luck.

[–] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Republicans haven't given up claiming voter fraud is rampant, and they should know. They're the ones perpetrating it.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

That's why they keep trying to claim the 2020 election was stolen: they just can't fathom how they could cheat so hard and still manage to lose.

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

52 counts of voter fraud

Taylor faces up to five years in prison on each count.

Always a #GOP #fascist. A year for each charge sounds appropriate.

[–] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd argue 5 for each is fine. Regardless of wether she can live long enough to serve them.

[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Keep the body chained to the wall for the entire 260 years and throw every republican sentenced to do time into the cell with her corpse. Really drive home how bad they fucked up.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Two Iowa State students, Tam and Thien Doan, took the stand and said that when they tried to file absentee ballots in Ames, they discovered someone had already cast a ballot in their names. They are Democrats, but their votes supported all Republican candidates, including former President Donald Trump. They were able to get new ballots in time for the general election.

Oh my god, that would have pissed me off so much.

And if it was me, (presumably, based on the names) an Asian-American in Iowa, if I was being denied my right to vote and it turned out my ballot went to a Republican, I would have assumed it was because I was Asian that they did it, what with Republicans and racism and deep red Iowa. But apparently not.

[–] sirico@feddit.uk 7 points 1 year ago

Should be an act of treason