UPDATE: ***URGENT Action Required*** NEW YORK voters

[Chezboo]

Last edited Wed Apr 13, 2016, 05:25 PM - Edit history (1)

It was upsetting to wake up to accusations of lying and deceit on my part in this op. After reading the condemnations this morning, I did check the fb link I posted and saw that it was not identical to what I posted (although they made some overnight edits to their original version as well), so I've gone back to try and piece together how this mess happened.

I copied a post shared by Sane Progressive( https://www.facebook.com/saneprogressive/?fref=ts )
by Stewart McCauley‎ to Documenting Democratic Primary Election Fraud: 2016 (https://www.facebook.com/groups/1649941911932852/), see top of original post. There were other sites posting this info and requesting it be broadcasted especially due to critical reaction time, one being the subreddit, Sanders for President. I checked a couple other sites to make sure the party handling the action, contacts and other information was all the same. In my rush to get this info out, I did not notice the body of the copied post from McCauley contained Bernie content that the linked post above did not. As a Bernie supporter he may have changed it to post on Bernie forums but in any event, that was the post I copied - not altered. That was a big oversight on my part, which I do apologize for, but it was not done to misinform, be deceitful or misrepresent. My objective was to bring attention to registration problems in NY (and elsewhere) to protect the vote. There does seem to be switching and other problems heavily affecting a certain direction, but I am only addressing the accusations of altering, misrepresenting, lying, deceiving, manipulation... here. Add to that, I noticed at the Voters whose registration was changed without their knowledge in NY fb page, https://www.facebook.com/groups/518955314959236/525242040997230/
an update linking to the "official landing page and announcement" link, so I just posted it at the bottom of the op for what I thought was further useful information, not as a link to the op, so that's how that link got there - and caused more confusion. I am not new at DU, but I am new at posting here. I did make a mistake, but it was unintended and again, I apologize. This is also my second attempt at clarifying what happened, as I accidentally deleted the first one, so I also apologize if it's overly confusing, but I've spent enough time on this already. With that, I am going to add the correct announcement below and will crosspost this at the Bernie forum as well:



EMERGENCY!
NEW YORK voters and ALL concerned with the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Primaries! Please read the following:
- An initial survey in New York, in which voters were asked to double-check their registrations, found that 50% (HALF) of the registrations had had their party affiliation SWITCHED without their knowledge or consent. That means there are potentially thousands of voters who registered won't be allowed to vote next week.
- We at Election Justice USA (ElectionJusticeUSA.org) are filing an emergency injunction to address this issue. Whether due to a clerical or technical error, these issues MUST be addressed before April 19th.
- HELP by checking your New York voter registration @ canivote.org.If anything is amiss, fill out our secure form @ ElectionJusticeUSA.org.
- WHETHER YOU ARE IN NY OR ELSEWHERE, please spread this message far and wide! Share this post on your personal page! Share it in all groups you belong to! Ensure that every last friend and family member in New York state checks their voter registration and reports any odd findings via our form @ ElectionJusticeUSA.org.
- If this legal battle is successful, democracy will have a fighting chance in New York.
For Our Democracy,
Election Justice USA | ElectionJusticeUSA.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Stewart McCauley‎ to Documenting Democratic Primary Election Fraud: 2016

EMERGENCY! BERNIE NEEDS OUR HELP!

NEW YORK voters and ALL concerned with the outcome of the 2016 presidential primaries! Please read the following:

-An initial survey in New York, in which voters were asked to double-check their registrations, found that 50% (HALF!) of Bernie Sanders supporters' registrations had been SWITCHED from Democrat to independent without their knowledge or consent. That means there are potentially thousands of Bernie supporters who registered as Dem before the deadline but won't be allowed to vote next week.

-We at Election Justice USA are filing an emergency injunction to address this issue. Whether due to a clerical or technical error, these issues MUST be addressed before April 19th.

-HELP BERNIE by checking your New York voter registration @ canivote.org. If anything is amiss, fill out our secure form @ ElectionJusticeUSA.org. Then, send a description of your issue to [e-mail], and mention that you filled out the form on our website.

-REGARDLESS of whether you are in New York or not, we need to spread this message far and wide! Share this post on your personal page! Share it in all groups you belong to! Ensure that every last friend and family member in New York state checks their voter registration and reports any odd findings via our form @ ElectionJusticeUSA.org.

-If this legal battle is successful, Bernie will have a fighting chance in New York.

For Our Democracy,
Election Justice USA | ElectionJusticeUSA.org

Official landing page and announcement http://electionjusticeusa.org on FB https://www.facebook.com/ElectionJusticeUSA/

[SFnomad]

1. So the BS cheerleaders are stating early with their excuses why BS doesn't do well in NY? n/t

[dchill]

2. You know that is a seriously fucked attitude, right?

[Peace Patriot]

40. NY SANDERS VOTERS: IGNORE THE EFFORT TO DERAIL THIS THREAD AND...

CHECK YOUR VOTER REGISTRATION!

Many thousands of people--mostly Sanders voters from all accounts--were deprived of their right to vote in Arizona because someone CHANGED their voter registration from Democratic to Independent WITHOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE. They had to wait in 4 to 5 hour lines to vote, and when they got to the front of the line, were told they couldn't vote in the Democratic primary and there was no remedy.

THIS IS REAL. IT HAS HAPPENED IN THIS ELECTION!

Google "Arizona's Primary Voting Fiasco."

By the numbers, the early voters in Arizona mostly voted for Clinton. The same day voters, who were able to vote, mostly voted for Sanders, and it was ONLY same-day voters who were disenfranchised.

NEW YORKERS, CHECK YOUR VOTER REGISTRATION!

As for the Clinton supporters here at DU who attempt, below, to belittle this matter, and ridicule it, and make you think it's nothing, and cause you NOT to check your voter registration--after what happened in Arizona!--I have not seen anything more despicable from Clinton supporters than this. This is FOUL PLAY!

I've been a Democratic voter and activist for over 50 years. I canvassed for JFK in 1960 at age 16. And the only people I've ever seen such behavior from are Republicans of the worst sort.

[Chezboo]

49. Thank you!

You said it much better than me. From what I hear, the group heading this effort up is the same one involved with the AZ fiasco.

[cannabis_flower]

77. From now on

Every time you register, take a picture of your registration on your phone, then send your registration Return Receipt Requested. They can't claim they didn't get it and you have a copy of what you sent.

[flor-de-jasmim]

102. Great idea! I would add that you state that only PHONE VERIFIED changes can be made.

Otherwise, they could still potentially claim you changed your mind later.

[KPN]

162. +1000000!!!!

I like that "IGNORE THIS EFFORT TO DERAIL THIS THREAD" -- good on you!

[senz]

166. +1000

Thank you, Peace Patriot. This is important.

Isn't it AMAZING that they don't want New Yorkers to check their voter registration?

[Chezboo]

4. Why am I not surprised...

You think voters' affiliations being changed w/o their knowledge is an excuse?

[SFnomad]

5. I think voter affiillation being changed w/o someone's knowledge is serious

I also doubt it is happening anywhere near the rate the thread is talking about ... if it is happening at all.

Do some critical thinking ... this doesn't pass the smell test.

[pdsimdars]

107. And how does it hurt to check your registration? Your comment seems to say people shouldn't check

Why do you think it is a problem to check? (with no disrespect to your nose)

[SFnomad]

113. Where did I say it hurts to check your registration? Oh that's right ... I didn't

and if it hurts, you might want to go see a doctor about it.

Now it "seems" you need to read words into something that I have written, that I have not written. Stick to what I have actually said, not your wild fantasies.

[KPN]

164. I dunno. Your post and the ones upthread seem kind of silly.

But that's okay, we live in a silly world.

[SFnomad]

168. The OP makes some bold claims with nothing to back it up

my response is hardly silly. It feels like the poster is setting things up to make excuses for BS's big loss, rather than face reality.

[KPN]

175. Sigh!

[SFnomad]

177. I know, it's exasperating when someone asks for proof and you don't have any. n/t

[pdsimdars]

204. No you just said it was a stupid idea and wasn't happening, wasn't true. . . .

Usually when someone is saying something isn't happening, it kiind of seems like you're discouraging people away from that idea.
And I said, whatever, it wouldn't hurt to check it out rather than rely on YOUR NOSE.

That seems like common sense. Why would someone chance their ability to vote on YOUR opinion when it only takes a few minutes to be certain?

Talk about fantasies.

[leftynyc]

73. Tell me

How would they KNOW these are Bernie voters? Yes, I think the Bernie supporters don't see the polls turning for Bernie in NY, know that NY is far too important for him to lose and are looking for an excuse for his inevitable NY loss. Just THINK. How would they know who was going to vote for Bernie?

[cannabis_flower]

79. Perhaps

they are just assuming that people changing registrations are voting for Bernie. I don't think most people who are already registered as Democrats aren't being changed

[brooklynite]

92. The OP isn't saying people are changing their registrations...

...it's saying that registrations are being changed without permission.

Unless you're saying that people are changing their registrations, and then they're being changed back? THAT suggests that they were never changed in the first place.

[cannabis_flower]

93. This line...

is the one that made me think they had just changed their registration:

That means there are potentially thousands of Bernie supporters who registered as Dem before the deadline but won't be allowed to vote next week.


Maybe it's a mix of the two. Maybe people changed their registration, checked and it said Democrat, checked again and it had changed back to Independent. In any event, if you take a picture, then mail Return Receipt Requested then there will be proof of how you changed your registration and that they received it.

[LiberalFighter]

193. New York requires any party affiliation has to take place about 6 months prior to a primary.

For a voter to vote in that primary.

[cannabis_flower]

210. What's your point?

People who changed their registration - before the deadline are rechecking their registration and have found that it has been switched back (or possibly never changed) . My point is, that if they had a copy of their registration application showing the change and a receipt from the post office showing that the registrars office received it, then they can prove that they changed their registration by the deadline, then when they show up to vote and have to vote provisionally their vote can be counted when they present this evidence to the voter registrar.

By the way, this method would also work in for Hillary supporters or in a general election if you showed up to vote for whoever the Democratic candidate was and they said you weren't registered to vote.

[LiberalFighter]

211. There is no documented evidence of the voters having their political affiliation changed yet

and we don't know if it was done before or after the deadline. Right now it is just hearsay or information without the necessary details.

If they had their registration changed on them then that is a problem.
If they do have documentation showing they did it before the deadline it needs to be compiled to determine the extent of it. And if they have the documentation they should be able to reverse the action.

I'm not going to believe everything a person just because they say it happens. I know how easy it is for people to think they did everything right.

[pdsimdars]

106. Remember Bernie's voter data was hacked first.

And like I told the other guy, how can it hurt to check? And why would you try to dissuade people from checking?

[leftynyc]

111. Where did I dissuade?

In fact, I SPECIFICALLY said everyone should check every year (post #72). The sore losers aren't liking the polls not turning around and are looking for excuses. If there is proof of foul play, serve it up.

[pdsimdars]

205. But the polls ARE turning. . . oops!

[leftynyc]

209. Go ahead an post any

poll that doesn't have her double digits ahead....and not just in NY. You are another who is not understanding MATH. Bernie can't lose NY by ANY amount. He has to win NY and win it BIG in order to eat away at Hillary's delegate lead.

[bkkyosemite]

129. The switching of votes have happened for years now on vote machines. Now they just hack

into the election system now before hand....Because maybe those that complained said they were Bernie supporters.

[Tanuki]

134. The link in the OP doesn't say anything at all about Bernie supporters. The OP altered

the content of the Facebook link. Quite deceptive and dishonest. Click on the Facebook link if you don't believe me.

[KPN]

165. That's a good point. So why don't you all send this out to Hillary supporters too?

Fraudulent elections are fraudulent regardless of who is affected afterall.

[senz]

170. NGP VAN database software

That would do it.

[ThePhilosopher04]

35. Voter suppression is a serious issue regardless of party

you should be taking this seriously since it won't end with the primaries.

[SFnomad]

36. Maybe you should read my Post #5, the one right above yours n/t

[highprincipleswork]

62. What exactly are you "smelling" to know?

[SFnomad]

63. I'm smelling BS right now ... really not much different than the OP n/t

[highprincipleswork]

65. I think you must be smelling the fumes of your own fervor, based on the clear shenanigans

in practically every process we have seen in this primary so far.

[pdsimdars]

108. What needs to be said over and over. . . .how can it hurt to check?

And why would people try to dissuade people from checking?
If it's nonsense, then at least you KNOW. Otherwise you could be surprised like people in AZ.

[highprincipleswork]

182. Oh, it wouldn't only hurt one side. Only ones I've seen reported so far are from Bernie supporters.

[pdsimdars]

200. And that's why they were protesting so much .. .

[Dragonfli]

71. David Brock scratch and sniff crothch stickers? Who knows what someone "smells" and why,

maybe the poster is having a stroke, odd smells are a sign of that, but as far as I know, smelling is not associated with reading or numerous reports of party affiliation switching across many different states.

[B Calm]

128. So even if it's true you don't give a shit as long as Hillary wins?

[SFnomad]

152. Bzzzzt .... no, but thanks for playing, we have wonderful parting gifts for you n/t

[ChisolmTrailDem]

151. On ignore you go. Bye. nt

[SFnomad]

153. You could have done that without dramatically notifying me about ...

but hey, if it makes you happy.

Buh bye.

[Avalux]

155. This is what enthusiasm and dedication look like. Sorry you don't understand that.

Bernie will win New York precisely because his supporters work hard to make sure everyone knows what's going on. All you sourpusses seem to condone voter shenanigans. Why is that?

[Demsrule86]

159. Bernie said he can win without New York

Personally I don't think he can.

[KPN]

161. No, they are just punching back before hand.

[senz]

163. Why wouldn't Hill fans want New Yorkers to check their registrations?

[SFnomad]

171. Wher did I say that? Why do so many BS fans ask questions of things never stated? n/t

[Cheese Sandwich]

3. LOL

[NanceGreggs]

8. You know ...

... I could "alert" on that meme.

But I won't.

First, because given what is allowed here nowadays, "alerting" is pointless.

Second, because I'm happy to see it stand as a reminder to the Admins, and every actual Democrat here, just how low this site has actually sunk.

[Cheese Sandwich]

12. You don't like it?

[NanceGreggs]

20. It's not a matter ...

... of whether I like it or not.

As I said, it's just another example of how low DemocraticUnderground has sunk.

[Cheese Sandwich]

22. I think it's hilarious.

Hillary benefits when new voters registrations are mysteriously changed.

[NanceGreggs]

24. Well, then I'll anxiously await ...

... the evidence that this was done, along with proof of Hillary's involvement.

I am SURE you have facts to back up any assertions that you make - ya know, just like you always do.

[Cheese Sandwich]

28. No in fact I didn't even read the OP.

I just saw it was something about registrations being changed and thought oh crap there's a sweet meme for this.

[sheshe2]

33. Holy Shit!

No in fact I didn't even read the OP.




I just saw it was something about registrations being changed and thought oh crap there's a sweet meme for this.

Holy Mother!~ You DID NOT READ THE OP YET HERE YOU ARE COMMENTING ON IT!!!!!GOOD JOB!

[Cheese Sandwich]

39. Probably not my finest hour LOL

[sheshe2]

207. Well thank you for that. nt

[pdsimdars]

109. I wonder why people assume it was Hillary who would change them IF they were changed?

You seem to assume if it was done it was she who did it.
That was a cute picture, but it was a joke. I mean, look at that picture, her smile is really cute.

[bkkyosemite]

131. Somehow I don't think you will await with anxiousness.

[revbones]

32. What justification would you use to alert on that?

I mean, aside from the normal bogus crap about not speaking ill of democrats, or some such blather.

[NanceGreggs]

44. Well, there would be the TOS ...

... crap about this site being dedicated to electing Democrats. And once upon a time, you didn't speak ill of Democrats without risking a tombstone.

But that's all blood under the bridge now. You can call any Democrat anything you want now - just like on FreeRepublic! - and no one will bother you.

But hey, traffic is traffic - and traffic means money.

[revbones]

48. Seriously, what part of the ToS do you think you could justify an alert on that with?

I am tired of bogus alerts and I'm sure many others are as well. People alert on things because they feel you shouldn't speak ill of anyone with a "D" behind their name, no matter what they do.

Here's a nice tidbit from the Terms of Service "But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. "

So I ask you again, what part of the Terms of Service would you use to justify your alert threat?

[Bobbie Jo]

126. Of course

You're still new. The current state of DU is all you know. The newer folk have had a hand in defining the standards around here, so yeah, here we are...

There was a time when this place had actual standards that were even enforced.

[revbones]

130. So you're agreeing with me or the one threatening to alert on people that can't back up their claim?

Sorry, that wasn't clear. It seems like you're agreeing with them because of your statement "newer folk have had a hand in defining the standards".

I'm not aware of when the Terms of Service was updated, but I, and many others I gather, do not like the current state of "alert on anything you don't like and hope for a friendly jury".

The fact is, according to the Terms of Service, the "D" isn't magical and you can discuss their failings. This is one reason thigns are different in the US, we can talk about our leaders. It's not North Korea with our Dear Leader that we can speak no ill of... This is also how the party gets better, by addressing faults.

[Bobbie Jo]

133. Neither

I'm simply making an observation. Many a newb wouldn't have made it past the first week back in the day.

It's just sad, this used to be a decent hangout for
Dems. I'll just let your post stand as Exhibit A.

[revbones]

136. So you say it's sad but then agree with neither position. Weird.

[JTFrog]

140. Especially the ones that come blazing into the forum using right wing attacks against Democrats.

Then they take up residence taunting and trolling people who have been here for many many years trying to piss them off enough to get their posts hidden. The fact that they come in and prop up right wing propaganda and pretend they are dealing in facts just blows my mind. As you said, if they had tried this shit years ago (before the Lord of the Flies jury system) mods would have tossed them out on their asses within a week and then tossed all their following zombie accounts as well.

I cannot wait for the new DU rules the admins have been talking about putting in place once we hit "general election season".

[Bobbie Jo]

144. Amen, sister.

[Desert805]

156. I've been hanging out here since practically day one

And HOOO BOY has Obama had shit slung his way since he took office. Sometimes deservedly so (refer back to the TOS posted above)

Nice try.

[Bobbie Jo]

172. This is true.

In fact, after 2009 it has gotten progressively worse.

The vicious personal attacks, RW sources, and general nastiness...not so much. These people were shown the door in short order.

You have to admit, there was a low tolerance for that sort of thing. Now, it's SOP.

No trying necessary, it is what it is.

[bvf]

38. Oh, go ahead.

You can always shoot for the flag, right?

Anyway, this site could sink a lot lower.

If the three Clinton supporters who immediately come to mind and who are currently flagged for review were back, that is.

Go right ahead!

[NanceGreggs]

66. "This site could sink a lot lower."

Yeah, it can.

There were so many times - especially over the last few months - when I thought, "Well, it can't get any lower than THIS" - but then it did.

So I've no doubt it will continue to do so.

[bvf]

81. So take my advice and alert.

There's no real downside if you truly believe you should. Besides, there's a chance you could send someone into review.

If you honestly believe the post that offends you so deeply is alertable--and you've already said as much--then you should do what you think is the correct thing, instead of wringing your hands and pining for the good old days.

I guess you'd rather shake your fist, grind your teeth, and grumble.

Oh, well.

[Desert805]

157. Yeah, I agree

With every lame defense of corporate influence and war for profit I see, I think the same thing.

[rbrnmw]

195. flagged for review due to alert stalking and Bernie friendly jurors

one of those people is an out spoken African American who has been harassed here for way longer than Bernie has been running.

[bvf]

197. A pure canard. And yeah...

we ALL know HOW outspoken. So much so that it became an embarrassment to the management.

Get lost.

[mariawr]

101. Remember the voter database breach brouhaha?

Where there's smoke, usually there's fire.

Both sides could see each other's info. Happened early on, too.

[LuvLoogie]

6. "Hillary ate my registration."

LO fucking L

[pdsimdars]

110. Not necessarily but they could have a list of Bernie supporters.

[fun n serious]

7. No one changed shiiit

They'r upset they can't change it now. Not the first time BS supporters lied

[Chezboo]

30. You don't know what you're talking about. People on this forum have had it happen to them. nt

[RandySF]

9. I didn't realize there was enough tin foil in this world for all these hats.

[NanceGreggs]

11. I wish I'd invested in Reynolds Wrap ...

... before this primary got off the ground.

I'd be a 1%er by now.

[obamanut2012]

76. I don't even know what to say about the OP

Except: I agree with you. What a financial windfall we missed.

[senz]

173. Ohh I knoow...who ever heard of "voter suppression?"

Ew. Only tin foil hat people think that ever happens ... uh huh uh huh ...

[sheshe2]

10. Cut off for declaring party affiliation was October

http://www.elections.ny.gov/

the urgency should have happened seven months ago.

[RandySF]

13. Rules are for other people.

Bernie's supporters should be able to do anything they want.

[sheshe2]

16. I guess.

[SFnomad]

14. That's not quite true

If you were a registered Independent or Republican and wanted to change your affiliation, the cut off was last October.

If you were not registered at all ... cutoff was a couple of weeks ago for first time registration and you could choose party affiliation at that time.

[sheshe2]

43. Party affiliation was my point.

Sorry you missed that. I was not talking about new voters.

[SFnomad]

46. You stated "declaring" party affiliation in the earlier post. If you meant what you are saying now

you should have said "changing" party affiliation. You could declare party affiliation up until a couple of weeks ago if you were not registered at all.

[sheshe2]

52. Lol!

K

[bvf]

53. Yep. Don't you find

these attempts at disinformation alarming?

From the link:

For already registered voters, any change to party enrollment was to have been requested by October 9th, 2015

(emphasis added)

[SFnomad]

55. It wasn't disinformation .. I believe the person was just unclear about what they meant

and the follow up seems to back that up.

But one thing is pretty clear, BS cheerleaders find conspiracies just about everywhere, don't they? I guess that's what happens when your candidate ends up on the losing side of a contest.

[bvf]

56. Clearly, it was meant to mislead.

And if you think suspecting election fraud is only for the conspiracy-minded, you must also think Bush won in 2000.

[SFnomad]

60. No, it wasn't ... but you go right ahead and put another layer on that tin foil hat of yours ...

not that it will do any good. It's also clear you have no idea what I think, even though I've posed enough things in this thread alone that you should have a better idea than you do.

[bvf]

64. Oh, it's pretty clear what you think. And I've read it all.

Last edited Wed Apr 13, 2016, 06:26 AM - Edit history (1)

Once the "tin-foil hat" thing is brought up, it's like crystal.

[hellofromreddit]

100. Could that person not edit the post?

I can edit my posts to correct errors, and I would assume I've got the same UI as everyone else.

[CoffeeCat]

15. Blaming the victim?

How quaint.

I'd love to see how happy you'd be if someone changed your registration and you were unable to vote for Hillary.

It's called empathy. Look into it.

This is an issue that all Democrats should be concerned about.

Not every Sanders supporter is wrong and deserves to be treated like a conspiracy theorist, simply because you don't share their views.

We should all want to get this one right.

[sheshe2]

27. You are on a roll here.

Blaming the victim?
How quaint.

I am a little scared here. Blaming the victim? It is a law in NY, sorry you were unaware of that. Keep informed.

I'd love to see how happy you'd be if someone changed your registration and you were unable to vote for Hillary.

Oh dear goddess!!!! NY did not change yours, you need to declare a party to vote. D or R if you are an I. Holy shit. Uninformed voters at there very best. UNAWARE!

Not every Sanders supporter is wrong and deserves to be treated like a conspiracy theorist, simply because you don't share their views.

You know something? Bernie supporters need to be aware of the laws in their states, so should Bernie. This is not CT it is voter awareness.

[Tanuki]

138. The OP altered and misrepresented the information at the Facebook site. Check the link

in the OP. The Facebook post said NOTHING about Bernie being targeted. The OP fabricated that.

[Chezboo]

19. They were done before the cutoff and some people are noticing now

or won't know until they go vote and then won't be allowed to. We are also not just talking about new voters... there are voters registered as democrats for years.

[Dragonfli]

29. New voters are not subject to the "October rule" as a poster below assumed, so if they registered D

They are the victims of election fraud lust like long time Democrats that have always been Democrats that had their affiliation changed.
Also, as you pointed out, Independents that did change in time to do so before the October deadline were victims of election fraud.

Either, a corrupt official with computer access to the system has been doing this or a hacker has been "paid likely by whoever profits politically from the fraud".

Have the Hillary voters been experiencing these fraudulent activities as well or is it one sided? Someone should look into that as well.

This needs to be investigated, and databases need to be audited as well by FBI specialists that know how to track this type of tampering.

I knew something fishy was up when during that period that the Sanders campaign was locked out of the system, suddenly, starting the next days and weeks after, Sanders voters were all of a sudden receiving emails from the Clinton campaign, someone stold or was sold his list of supporters!

[Chezboo]

42. I was hoping you would see this.

If it's happening to hrc supporters I haven't heard and, as witnessed by the rude responses to a civil message sharing, I don't care. It was interesting that after the October lock-out Sanders' supporters started receiving letters from Clinton requesting donations in the exact amount they had given to Sanders.

[Dragonfli]

21. This post was not about switching TO Democratic From independent

It was about Democrats having their affiliation witched for them to Independent, as to your statement:

Cut off for declaring party affiliation was October

That only applies to voters changing party affiliation, and NOT to newly registered voters declaring an affiliation of a party, so



1) read the actual post before commenting, it saves from not knowing what was actually posted (this is in regards to the title of my reply)

2) learn the actual rules of my State before making false assumptions (this referrers to the quote of something you posted)

[NanceGreggs]

17. 50%? REALLY?

Who did the switching?

How did "they" do it?

How did "they" know who were Bernie supporters and who were HRC supporters?

This is an AMAZING story - it just lacks a few key points, like details and evidence. Other than that, it's a can't-miss fairytale being trotted out as fact!

[revbones]

34. Really? You're going to trivialize potential election fraud?

Why are you even a Democrat at all if you don't believe in fair elections? Why not just go all the way and become a Republican?

[nolawarlock]

57. I fail to see how Nance is trivializing anything.

She makes it quite clear that there is no actual fact involved in any of this. It's all just speculation. I for one wouldn't support this sort of voter suppression against any candidate from any party but unless one can demonstrate how someone would switch only the Sanders supporters from Democrat to Independent and not also switch Hillary supporters, I honestly cannot see how this is even considered a valid story. Actually having experienced more than a few Bernie supporters in my personal social circle freaking out because they couldn't vote as Independents in closed primaries, it's a not a stretch to imagine that they'd just say they were switched because they didn't get their switch in before the deadline and wanted to game the system. If this were a case of real election suppression, backed by evidence and data and facts, I'd be the first to call out any candidate on it, but you're just wishfully speculating. It might make you feel great in front of that keyboard, but it will just be another tempest in a teacup in a rather tall pile of empty teacups thrown at Hillary in the past few decades.

[bahrbearian]

121. Like WMD, no facts just Speculation and that worked out just fine.

[nolawarlock]

180. Spot on. N/t

[revbones]

127. Someone says there's a problem

And you say it's just speculation. Even though that same problem has been reported in many previous states.

What evidence do you expect at this stage? The only evidence possible is someone having their registration changed and that's now been shown.

It must be nice to be able to just trivialize everything you don't like in the world to a "tempest in a teapot"

[nolawarlock]

181. has that really been shown?

I've certainly seen it talked about but how do we know it's true? I'd want to see actual proof of it beyond mere testimony, which is very suspect to me in a battle this heated. We're not trivializing voter suppression. We are saying make your case with evidence, not biased testimony and hyperbole.

[revbones]

183. Yes.

People from various states have shown their voter ID cards that say Democrat, and their current registration online that say something difference. Yes, it has been shown.

[nolawarlock]

186. Ok so the next question is ...

How would the people in charge of all this know whether the people changed were Bernie or Hillary supporters.

And mind you, I have not seen this proof you're talking about. You would think there would be more links posted.

[revbones]

187. Look. If you choose to not believe it, that's on you.

But continually denying it when others comment on it is not becoming.

First, the claims were on both Hillary and Bernie supporters in multiple states had their registration changed. This "appears" to affect more Bernie supporters based on claims, but both sides have been affected.

Given the firewall was down multiple times, if one was of a mind to blame a campaign, accessing the data would be easy.

Also, I'm not your personal google. These are easily available facts and stories that have been posted here, on reddit and twitter. I would suggest researching those yourself if you are legitimately interested. Many of the people discussing these items in posts like these have seen them and don't feel the need to waste time googling for links to satisfy deniers all the time. Maybe you're legitimately interested, and if so then maybe I was too curt but given the ease of accessing these stories I think you should do more research yourself instead of just denying what's in someone's post.

[nolawarlock]

188. I prefer knowledge to belief

From everything I've read here and elsewhere, this is not the giant mountain you're making out of this molehill. I haven't seen a single Hillary supporter say this has happened so color me skeptical and if you don't want to provide hard data, don't be surprised when people call you out.

Something tells me that someone could say that Hillary sprouted devil wings and flew up to Mount Rushmore to carve her face on it and some folks here would "believe" it. I'm not interest in belief. I'm interested in what you can demonstrate and, so far, all I've seen is hyperbole and emotion.

[revbones]

191. Fine. Disbelieve if you want.

Most Hillary fans have their head in the sand anyway.

[nolawarlock]

192. I'm no great fan of her either.

I just think she's better than he is.

[Dragonfli]

69. Because, being Conservative Democrats (an oxymoron in my opinion) they miss the good old days

Back in the good old days, the Tammany Hall days, they knew a thing or two about keeping the corrupt politicians in, the gravy train rolling down the track, and how to keep only the votes of those that voted "the right way". They also knew how to perform a good old fashioned ballot stuffing as needed

[Renew Deal]

96. How did you come up with that number?

That's millions of people.

[revbones]

124. Did you mean to reply to me? I didn't mention numbers. nt

[Renew Deal]

125. Do you believe the number in the OP is accurate?

[IdaBriggs]

189. As a programmer, I can quickly change millions of records with a single query.

Sometimes it even happens by accident.

It is way easier to do than you probably realize.

[anotherproletariat]

18. How would someone with access to registration information know who is voting for Sanders?

Is there some secret code?

[Chezboo]

25. It may not just be Sanders voters.

All dems should be checking their registrations with all the voting problems that have been occurring.

[bahrbearian]

137. Data Gate. The unprotected server at the DNC

[RandySF]

23. .

[oasis]

75. Lol.

[carburyme]

179. Singing and humming to the tune of the

Twilight series

[TMontoya]

26. Already the excuses begin. nt

[Lodestar]

31. Recommend also posting this in the NY and Bernie Sanders forums

NY FORUM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1068

Bernie Forum
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1280

[Dragonfli]

51. It looks like Arizona was a trial run a victim of this hapening to a staffer of one of the officials

was heard spoken of on tape during the the interviews that were about long lines and such when this was also brought up and also as many here I am sure remember, the Arizona SoS admitted that it had happened to many others as well.

But, being a Republican run election, I doubt any investigation was launched, after all why should they care if we hand them the least electable in the GE election as we all know Clinton is? With such horrible favorable numbers second only in negatives to trump, extremely high numbers regarding dishonesty, and doing quite poorly compared to sanders in every head to head poll done yet against their candidates? They wouldn't naturally.

One hopes New York is no Arizona regarding not caring or investigating not only this, but other forms of election fraud and voter disenfranchisement.

This may even be a Republican election fraud scheme to get a chance to run against the one candidate they would unite together again to vote against, rather than just reflexively thinking this is just more DNC shenanigan as has been a regular occurrence, giving Hillary an edge at every opportunity (this fact causes the reaction), but it may actually be Republicans committing this new computer affiliation changing scheme, I would be curious to see if Trump affiliations were changed from Republican in their closed primaries.

[NanceGreggs]

37. "An initial survey in New York ...

... in which voters were asked to double-check their registrations, found that 50% (HALF!) of Bernie Sanders supporters' registrations had been SWITCHED from Democrat to independent without their knowledge or consent."

Where is the link to this "survey"? Who are the participants in this survey?

Who determined that 50% of Bernie supporters had been "switched" - and HOW did they determine that?

How did "they" (those allegeldly doing the switching)) know who were Bernie supporters as opposed to HRC supporters?

Who were the people involved in this grand switcheroo? Where are the details as to what they did, how they did it, and how they covered their tracks in the doing?

Thus far, the NY Board of Elections has not reported complaints from 50% of Bernie supporters that they've been "switched" from Democrats to Independents. Why is that? Is the entire Board of Elections in NY state in on 'the scheme"? Are they ALL on-the-take?

If so, where is the evidence to back this up?

This is truly beyond laughable.

[sheshe2]

50. Yikes!

[nolawarlock]

59. I notice they can't answer your valid points ...

... so they keep deflecting with accusations that we all somehow support voter fraud. No crime is so great that even innocence is not a defense.

[TreasonousBastard]

103. There is nothing to back this up-- it's nonsense...

dangerous nonsense.

Imagine my surprise when, during my weekly tiptoeing through this normally hidden forum, I find this idiotic OP. Well, not exactly surprise.

I'm on the local Dem committee and been canvassing during elections and dealing with the Suffolk County BoE for maybe 10 years now, and I have had plenty of people not know how they are registered. Some parts of the county a "D" registration will still cause you trouble in town, so a lot of people are simply "none of the above" and a big problem is when they come in to vote in a primary and can't-- and they don't remember what they chose when they registered 5 years ago.

A wholesale effort to find Berniacs and change their registrations? Ridiculous.

[Peace Patriot]

41. K&R 1,000x!!! THIS IS VERY URGENT!

New Yorkers, check your voter registration!

[pat_k]

45. Should be a call out to ALL NY voters planning to vote in either Repub or Dem primary.

If a problem exists, it would undoubtedly affect similar numbers of Repubs and Dems, and on the Dem side, similar numbers of Bernie and Hillary voters.

If ElectionJusticeUSA.org is serious about integrity of elections, and if a warning is needed, they should be targeting every voter planning on voting in either primary.

Unless, as in Arizona, there is evidence that something occurred when data was migrated from one system to another -- or some such -- I don't see this getting far.

Has there been a system change of some sort in NY? (Or privatization of data management there?)

Also, just wondering. Does NY issue some sort of registration confirmation or voter ID card? If so, does it have party affiliation on it?

[Dragonfli]

58. They issue voter registration cards to new voters with affiliation marked , but if the computer

is wrong they will not be on the roles at the voting locations and will not be allowed to cast a ballot regardless (the workers go off roll sheets printed from the computer and adhere strictly to those rolls).

perhaps such a voter can obtain a provisional ballot, but this would not include physical card evidence, only computer database evidence would be used to decide if they are to be counted.

Also long time voters don't always get new cards unless their polling location changes so showing a card with a D on it eight or 10 years old, wouldn't matter even if the above were not true regarding role sheets and computer listed validation regarding whether to count such provisional ballots.

in short, without an investigation and a restoration of the tampered with or "accidentally damaged" database showing false results regarding affiliation. We are up shits creek without a paddle.

effectively and efficiently cheated out of our right to vote in the primary of our own party, and that's it folks.

[pat_k]

67. Thanks for the info. And...

I realize cards might not be of much help on April 19. I was thinking more in terms of investigation. (i.e., If you have a card indicating D, but online registration is something else, seems to me the state would have to inform you when/how it changed. If their records show you registered that way, then clearly, record is wrong.)

The types of errors that could happen in a data migration would be unlikely to appear as having occurred through an "official" change process. If registration doesn't match card, and state has no explanation, clearly there's a problem.

On edit: If unexplained card/record discrepancies can be shown to exist -- even if just a handful -- it would be important evidence in any legal action seeking remedy.

[Dragonfli]

70. It's more than online registration, that is a red herring, it is about the database itself,

that holds ALL of the voter registration affiliation regardless of how one registered, as far as I know, most mail in or show up in person to register to vote. Also, if it were only online registration, long time Democrats would not see this happening as well, as is the case. The problem is in the Database itself and has nothing to do with how one registers, this is important, so don't misunderstand me on this point.

When checking online what your registration status is as well as if your address is correct and your party affiliation hasn't been changed etc.- that check is a query of the database that has all the information for all the registered voters, online registration is quite new and I wasn't frankly aware it even exited until quite recently, never having done it that way, nor known anyone that had done it that way.

Also when canvassing, all the new voters I helped to register I did so by providing the mail in form (I collected stacks of them from the registration office for that purpose), also those that receive snap benefits, medicaid, or tanf, have attached with every letter from social services a detachable extra page that is a voter registration form, so I know most poor people newly involved now that they are back in the conversation again (via Sanders) and a politician is talking about their issues again (rather that just the usual suburban middle class that is as low as politicians have talked about regarding class) for a very long time before Sanders are likely registering that way.

[pat_k]

82. When I used the term online I meant the lookup.

I actually didn't know whether or not NY had online registration.

What I'm thinking about is the database records. I understand that you can verify current status online (and I assume in person or by phone too).

If there has been a change in party affiliation in the database record subsequent to the date a voter ID was issued, the record must have information about the transaction that initiated the change (i.e., record of some "official" procedure by which the change was requested). That information is probably not available in the online lookup system, but there has to be a way to find out when/how any changes were requested.

Changes that are the result of some error or corruption of the data generally occur without explanation. That is, the change happens without there being a record of a "change request."

Anyway, what I was thinking is that it would be nice if any instances could be found where (1) ID shows party affiliation X, (2) database record shows party affiliation Y, and (3) the database has no record of the change request that caused X to be changed to Y. If any instances like this could be identified, it would be proof positive that there are errors in the database.

It is easier to prove data has been corrupted than to prove it has been tampered with. If the record shows that they changed your affiliation in response to a mailed request, and you never made such a request, then it's a "he said/she said." The change is "explained" within the system.

[Dragonfli]

88. Sorry I misunderstood you, everthingyou just posted is really good and helpful thinking and all

of those points are excellent and may very well be a good way to beat this, if anyone listens and applies some or all ott your thinking, perhaps adding more to the plan that would also help prove and address the situation properly.

[AzDar]

47. K & R

[nenagh]

54. K&R

[Joob]

61. I don't know who's behind that, but are we seriously still calling it a clerical error?it's Sabotage

Should be investigated. Regardless of who you support. Then again, this is the Democratic party.

[NanceGreggs]

68. I see you've now posted ...

... this totally ludicrous "urgent alert" in the Bernie Group.

Good thinking. You're bound to have more - uh - "believers" there than anywhere else.

[Dragonfli]

74. Less election fraud enthusiasts cheering on such illegality, and less disruption there, yes /nt

[bvf]

86. *Ahem*

Number of blocked members:

Clinton group: 821
Sanders group: 332

What was that about "believers," again?

[leftynyc]

72. LOL

What a bunch of crap. Like someone with those lists would know who would vote for Bernie and who would vote for Hillary. This is nothing but an excuse for Bernie losing next Tuesday. People were waiting for the polls to turn around and they haven't and now they need a new excuse. This is pathetic. Everyone should check their registration every year to make sure their vote will count but the notion they are screwing with Bernie voters (how the fuck would they KNOW?) is laughable.

[obamanut2012]

78. This

[Peace Patriot]

80. Sorry, you fail the Arizona election integrity test!

You don't know what happened there. And I'd tell you, except that you obviously don't want to know and don't care, so why should I bother?

Good night! Peace. You need it.

[leftynyc]

83. More excuses

How pathetic. There is ZERO proof this is happening. ZERO. Show me some proof and I'll fight right along side you but without it, it just looks like excuses and sour grapes.

[oasis]

85. Kindly explain how the culprits knew which voters backed Bernie.

[NurseJackie]

94. They can't. It's just paranoia. Pure silliness.

[oasis]

150. No wonder Thom Hartmann is able to sell so much gold.

[NCTraveler]

84. Greatly appreciate what is being done here even though...

The writer should win awards for derp worthiness. This sounds like Sanders has somehow gotten on the inside and is involved in even MORE election fraud. Changing dems to independents clearly hurts Clinton. Dems are her base, not Sanders base.

[Starry Messenger]

87. How would they know from the registration who the person supports?

[pdsimdars]

105. Good question

Maybe that's the data the Clinton campaign stole when they first hacked Bernie's data.

[Starry Messenger]

145. No, Bernie stole Clinton's Iowa data.

Too bad he lost anyway. Thems the breaks.

[Tanuki]

89. I clicked on the Facebook page, and it does not say what you claim. I put the changes in bold.

Did you change it, to try to make it about Bernie, and if so, why? Or did they edit it to delete references to Bernie in the meantime, and if so, why do you think they did?

Here is a direct copy:

EMERGENCY!

NEW YORK voters and ALL concerned with the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Primaries! Please read the following:

- An initial survey in New York, in which voters were asked to double-check their registrations, found that 50% (HALF) of the registrations had had their party affiliation SWITCHED without their knowledge or consent. That means there are potentially thousands of voters who registered won't be allowed to vote next week.

- We at Election Justice USA (ElectionJusticeUSA.org) are filing an emergency injunction to address this issue. Whether due to a clerical or technical error, these issues MUST be addressed before April 19th.

- HELP by checking your New York voter registration @ canivote.org. If anything is amiss, fill out our secure form @ ElectionJusticeUSA.org.

- WHETHER YOU ARE IN NY OR ELSEWHERE, please spread this message far and wide! Share this post on your personal page! Share it in all groups you belong to! Ensure that every last friend and family member in New York state checks their voter registration and reports any odd findings via our form @ ElectionJusticeUSA.org.

- If this legal battle is successful, democracy will have a fighting chance in New York.

For Our Democracy,
Election Justice USA | ElectionJusticeUSA.org

[NurseJackie]

95. And there you have it ... deception and lies. Proof!

Good god!

[MineralMan]

115. Deception on the part of the OP, it seems.

By adding "Bernie" to the original material, the OP has materially altered content to deceive.

[Trajan]

139. The changes introduced by the OP are appropriate, given the fact

That this is the Bernie Group, with a specific focus on that one candidate ...

The Hillary supporters are free to post a similar 'focused' message to their own group ....

This is not a nefarious edit of an original message - it is focused on group members who happen to support Bernie Sanders, IN the 'safe harbor' group where those supporters reside ...

[Tanuki]

141. This is not the Bernie Group. If it were I wouldn't be posting in this thread, as I was

banned the first time I posted there, because I asked if Mannie Garcia had endorsed anyone yet.

[tammywammy]

149. This is GDP, not the Bernie Group.

[geek tragedy]

90. Preemptive excuses. I'm sure that survey was really scientific. nt

[brooklynite]

91. Tell us: how did the County BOEs KNOW that you all were Sanders supporters?

...because I haven't heard of anyone else complaining other than on Facebook and Reddit posts...

[Renew Deal]

97. How was there no election fraud in NY until Bernie showed up?

[Renew Deal]

98. Why are you only concerned with Bernie voters being disenfranchised?

[Renew Deal]

99. How did they come up with the 50% number and do they know the % of all other voters switched?

Have they alerted other campaigns of the results of their survey or just Bernie?

[pdsimdars]

104. Is that the only way Hillary can win, by dirty tricks? Let's see if it's true, but is sounds like

things they've done in the past.

[obamanut2012]

147. What in the world does this OP have to do with Hillary Clinton?

[tammywammy]

154. You should go read the original FB post and not the edited OP

Since the FB post doesn't mention Bernie at all.

[Godhumor]

112. Oh dear Lord. A 50% switch targeted at 1 candidate! Horse. Shit.

Glad that we're already establishing the CT for a NY loss.

[MineralMan]

114. I checked. Why did you change the wording of the original

at your link? Did you think that people would not click through to it?

[Gothmog]

116. Jury results

I am a Clinton supporter but voted to leave this post. It survived the alert 1 to 7

[NWCorona]

117. Why was this post alerted?

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
On Wed Apr 13, 2016, 09:28 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

***URGENT Action Required*** NEW YORK voters
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511719236

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This poster CHANGED the wording on the content at the link in the post to add "Bernie" in several places. The original at the link only refers to "voters." Changing what was posted at a source and pretending that what is posted on DU is identical is just plain deception. This should be hidden.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Apr 13, 2016, 09:36 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Why change the wording from 'voters' to 'Bernie voters' if you weren't trying to manipulate the members of this Democratic site?

My first impression was to leave it, now I vote to Hide it for the manipulation.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[JTFrog]

119. On the Bernie subreddit they are saying this is uncomfirmed and not real.

Maybe don't believe everything you read on facebook? Especially when someone goes out of their way to edit the original content.

[MineralMan]

123. Editing original content and posting it without

disclosing that editing is deceptive. It's that simple. The original on Facebook didn't include the word "Bernie" anywhere. It's not OK to change what you quote in posts on DU without saying that you changed it.

I can't imagine ever doing such a thing on DU. It's dishonest.

[Dragonfli]

135. Because if the word gets out it is a threat to them

Election Justice USA
12 hrs ·
EMERGENCY!
NEW YORK voters and ALL concerned with the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Primaries! Please read the following:
- An initial survey in New York, in which voters were asked to double-check their registrations, found that 50% (HALF) of the registrations had had their party affiliation SWITCHED without their knowledge or consent. That means there are potentially thousands of voters who registered won't be allowed to vote next week.
- We at Election Justice USA (ElectionJusticeUSA.org) are filing an emergency injunction to address this issue. Whether due to a clerical or technical error, these issues MUST be addressed before April 19th.
- HELP by checking your New York voter registration @ canivote.org. If anything is amiss, fill out our secure form @ ElectionJusticeUSA.org.
- WHETHER YOU ARE IN NY OR ELSEWHERE, please spread this message far and wide! Share this post on your personal page! Share it in all groups you belong to! Ensure that every last friend and family member in New York state checks their voter registration and reports any odd findings via our form @ ElectionJusticeUSA.org.
- If this legal battle is successful, democracy will have a fighting chance in New York.
For Our Democracy,
Election Justice USA | ElectionJusticeUSA.org

without any added importance to the Sanders campaign, (used to justify the attempted hide)
Which should be added to an OP about this as so far it only appears a one-sided error

https://www.facebook.com/ElectionJusticeUSA/

Ignore those that are trying to rationalize why this was alerted on, it it horse shit,

they want this unnoticed!
use the links in the OP and your own brain, don't think like a rock headed man wants you to.

[Zira]

208. Dumbest alert ever. You can only win by voter suppression. You're losing, deal with it.

[IamMab]

118. I guess it's fun to brag about his support with independents, until a closed primary...

Then it's time to pretend that voter registration was "switched" from Dem to independent recently somehow, when it likely took place years ago when the independent left the Dem Party.

Shoulda done your homework, kids. But then again, isn't that the point of supporting Bernie? So you don't have to do your homework and the government will still pay for your schooling?

[azurnoir]

132. Interesting to see Hillary's supporters cheering what amounts to voter suppression

or at the very least severely limiting who can vote - too bad that won't carry over into the GE

[IamMab]

196. It's not voters suppression for a party to make its own rules.

We have freedom of association. So do you. Start a party and run it whatever way you think is best. But if that's with open primaries, don't be surprised if you lose control of your party someday.

That's how progressives lost the Republican Party to conservatives, you know.

[azurnoir]

198. as I said OR limiting voter participation-parse it any way you wish but that is what it amounts to I

but that is what it amounts to IMO

[IamMab]

199. Parties are not governed by the Constitution.

Private groups can and should limit participation, so that their decision are made by their members. Should management be able to vote in union elections? Should atheists get to vote on how to manage Christian groups, or Muslims be able to influence Jewish groups?

There's a reason SCOTUS consistently rules that private groups get to direct their own policies. Because it's a basic right.

You are blatantly trying to override freedom of association with this concept of "make parties allow anyone to vote." Start your own party and run it how you see fit. Don't try to steal someone else's hard work. We Democrats maintain this party, and independents who left it gave up that right. That's their choice, and choices have consequences.

[azurnoir]

201. so wanting broader voter participation is overriding freedom of association?

do you need some of this?

[IamMab]

202. You're the one squealing for access you don't deserve.

You're the one trying to kneecap a constitutional right because it prevented a bunch if people who couldn't be bothered to learn the rules from voting. In other words, all the drama here is being brought in by you, no one else.

A snarky picture isn't winning this argument for you. You'll need to do better than that to take down part of our founding document. CA Dems v Jones, this is already settled.

"The bums lost, Lebowski!"

[Freddie Stubbs]

120. Ha ha

[Tarc]

122. How many times can the boy cry wolf here?

it begins to give off a whiff of bullshit after a few times.

[Dem2]

142. Seems exaggerated to me

They aren't all 50% on their official form:

Initial findings suggest that a significant percentage of New York voters are experiencing problems with voter registration leading up to the 2016 presidential primaries. Most commonly, this has involved unauthorized changes to registered party affiliation, though there have been a number of other relevant complaints. Regardless of whether these problems are the result of technical or clerical error, Election Justice USA will soon be filing a lawsuit to ensure that this issue is addressed BEFORE the New York presidential primary election on April 19th. If your voter registration information has been affected in any way, please fill out the following form. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1NFJTkSuZ5r2fOSGNm0DHcDWUKSiROkrH5GTbK_8m9bI/viewform?c=0&w=1

So, nothing like the alarmist bullshit in the O/P.

Oh, and BERNIE is not mentioned in any of their correspondence, this is a deceitful edit by the O/P who can now no longer be trusted to post reliable information.

[randome]

143. Reads like a hyperbolic email screed for donations.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[HughLefty1]

146. Tired of this B.S.

Voter registrations were changed out here in CA supposedly by the DMV.

These voter registration rules are inconsistent and need to be changed. It's just another form of suppression but I guess as long as the DNC gets their candidate nominated all is good. It is "funny" how these things keep happening to the so called "insurgent" non-establishment candidates in both parties.

[malokvale77]

148. Let me guess...

NGP VAN database software.

[senz]

169. ^^^ This ^^^

[malokvale77]

174. Oh, but how could they possibly know...

which registered voters were Sanders supporters.

The stench is strong.

[senz]

176. I so appreciate your making the connection.

It's shocking but also amusing to see Hill supporters sneering at the idea of people checking their voter registration.

I know Brock is dirty, but ... this. It is so repulsive.

[workinclasszero]

184. Its....Magic!

[KPN]

158. Everyone who believes in fair and honerst elections

regardless of who you support should get this out ... share on Facebook and any other social media you use. I did ... right away.

[senz]

160. SPREAD THIS INFORMATION VIA FB AND TWITTER.

Every New York Democrat should check their registration status.

[Babel_17]

167. Mine was OK, last time I checked, but thanks!

Even if just 1% are affected, it's very bad.

[azmom]

178. Voters were indeed disfranchised in Arizona

when their party affiliation was changed without their consent.

Please spread the word. It only takes a few minutes to check your status.

[IdaBriggs]

190. The Secretary of State testified it happened to one of her staffers.

Last I heard they were looking into how and whether some complaints from the past that were ignored may have been evidence of earlier "issues".

[Jitter65]

185. Bet 90% of them really didn't make the deadline. nt

[LonePirate]

194. How many people were included in this initial survey? 2? 400? 1500?

Are spouses allowed to change party affiliations online?

[Peace Patriot]

203. K&R again! Super Important!

[Kip Humphrey]

206. The most likely cause of voter affiliation switching is...

the integration of new electronic voter registration software with GEM$ vote software plus the Microsoft app (made specifically for Hillary for 2016) that also integrates with the voter registration software. I believe this app is owned by the DNC and it has been shared with the Sanders campaign.

The Microsoft app both tracks the vote count and also allows for voter registration. It has the capability to both query the electronic voter registration and GEM$ vote compilation software, and also to enter data into the electronic voter registration software.

ES&S PowerProfile® is a voter registration and election management application that enables election officials to register voters and conduct elections from a central data store. This system allows for both single jurisdictions and states to manage elections from the same interface. Election officials are able to register voters, check eligibility, conduct election activities such as prepare absentee and early voting, recruit election workers, create poll books and rosters, verify petitions, and maintain voter records using a single software solution.

CHECK YOUR VOTER REGISTRATION IMMEDIATELY!!!

[kiva]

212. I'm not normally a paranoid person,

but for this election I've made an exception.

Being slightly paranoid is what gave Bernie supporters the edge in Nevada; when the state Democratic Party send out a confusing e-mail to all Democratic delegates, Bernie supporters ignored it and showed up and won. When party officials said we could leave the convention after checking in, we didn't and were able to vote down a motion for a recount (after about a third of the delegates had left).

So, yeah, if I were in NY I'd be paranoid enough to check, and to encourage friends to do so also...thanks