# Voter Fraud



## P@triot (Jul 30, 2012)

Here are the facts related to voter fraud:

People seemingly voting after they've been dead for years. Drug kingpins buying votes from poor people to sway elections. Non-citizens being bussed to the polls and coached on how to vote. Stories of voting fraud are shocking, and states have been taking action to make sure that elections are secure. But the Justice Department, led by Attorney General Eric Holder, has blocked states at almost every turn.

This is the same Justice Department that*stopped a non-partisan election reform by arguing that if party affiliation were removed from a ballot, African-American voters wouldn't be able to identify and vote for the Democrats. Holder has continued to stoke the racial fires, calling a requirement for voters to produce photo identification a "poll tax." Heritage expert Hans von Spakovsky said this argument is merely political. "Holder continues to perpetuate the incendiary error to the public, knowing that the poll-tax assertion is a racially charged one that should not be used lightly," von Spakovsky said. He explained:
Even the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals&#8212;the most liberal appeals court in the country&#8212;did not buy the Holder poll tax claim when it reviewed Arizona's voter ID law. In Gonzalez v. Arizona (2012), the Ninth Circuit held that even though "obtaining the free identification required under [Arizona law] may have a cost," such immaterial costs are not a poll tax.

Holder is now "investigating" Pennsylvania's voter ID law, on the left's charge that it disenfranchises minorities.

Former Congressman Artur Davis, an African-American from Alabama who served in Congress as a Democrat from 2003 to 2011, finds this argument incredibly insulting. Speaking at The Heritage Foundation yesterday, Davis held up his driver's license and said, "This is not a billy club. It is not a fire hose. I used to represent Birmingham and Selma, Alabama, and I know something about fire hoses."

In states that have voter ID laws, the real-world results show that minorities have not been disenfranchised by any means. States that require ID to vote have offered free IDs to anyone who does not have one already. In Kansas, which allows any of nine different forms of ID as proof of identity to vote:
Out of a total of 1.713 million registered voters in Kansas, only 32 people had requested a free photo ID as of May 4, 2012. That represents only 0.002 percent of the registered voters in the state. Of those 32 voters, 80 percent were white, 10 percent were black, and the race or ethnicity of 10 percent was unknown. Thus, there is no evidence that minority voters were disproportionately affected.

Georgia, which has had voter ID since 2007, allows six different forms of ID to vote. And there has been no stampede of would-be voters who lack identification: "The number of photo IDs issued by Georgia to individuals who did not already have one of the forms of ID acceptable under state law is remarkably small, averaging less 0.05 percent in most years, and not even reaching three-tenths of 1 percent in a presidential election year."

What happened to minority voting after the law went into effect? In the 2008 presidential election, *Hispanic voting in Georgia increased by 140 percent* over the 2004 election. *African-American voting increased by 42 percent*. That is also a higher rate of increase than in other states without voter ID. Von Spakovsky notes:

The increase in turnout of both Hispanics and blacks in the 2008 presidential election after the voter ID law became effective is quite remarkable, particularly given the unproven and totally speculative claims of the Justice Department that the voter ID requirements of Texas and South Carolina will somehow have a discriminatory impact on Hispanic and black voters. *In fact, Georgia had the largest turnout of minority voters in its history*.

*The evidence that producing photo ID is a burden simply isn't there*. "How can it be a burden to ask people to do something they do all the time?" asked Congressman Davis, who said he went to a news organization to do an interview on voter ID and had to produce his driver's license to enter the news organization.

*The Justice Department requires ID from visitors as well*.

*..................................... Read more At.............................*

Morning Bell: Justice Department Blocks Voter ID at Every Turn


----------



## BDBoop (Jul 31, 2012)

I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'

There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 31, 2012)

BDBoop said:


> I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> 
> There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.



Where are your sources to back up your allegation? I posted a link to some concrete numbers.

Furthermore, why is your side of the aisle so *afraid* of this issue? If it stops even 1 vote that was fraudulent, I would think everyone would support that. Unless, of course, your the side behind the fraud.

The state of Georgia has actually seen a major increase in minority voting since requiring proper identification.

Trying to make the case that people shouldn't have to prove who they are before casting a vote is as asinine as trying to make a case that murder should be legalized. This is just stupid. I know the left is desperate, but you would think they would come up with a better argument than it should be ok to have voter fraud.


----------



## Navy1960 (Jul 31, 2012)

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections


We conclude that a State violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard.

Regardless of what the 9th may think in this matter, any fee that a voter  may pay for the sole purpose of voting is a  "poll tax" and violates the 24th amendment as well as the 14th.  These Voter ID laws  do not combat fraud  because  the  instances of fraud from them to combat is virtually nonexistant, and had it been such an issue as these states may claim, then it would have been so prior to this election.  In fact if these laws keep one American from voting simply because they cannot afford the documentation to obatain these ID's then they have  taken away that person(s)  right to express themselves under several constitutional Amendments.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Jul 31, 2012)

Voter fraud is just another scare tactic and that's it!

====================================================

_*Policy Brief on the Truth About &#8220;Voter Fraud&#8221;*
Summary

* Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare. 
* Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud. 
* Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct. 
* Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda. 
* Claims of voter fraud should be carefully tested before they become the basis for action.
<snip>
Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately *0.0009%* of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of *0.00004%*. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often.
 <snip>
Voter fraud is most often invoked as a substantial problem in order to justify particular election policies. Chief among these is the proposal that individuals be required to show photo ID in order to vote - a policy that *disenfranchises up to 10% of eligible citizens*. But the only misconduct that photo ID addresses is the kind of voter fraud that happens as infrequently as death by lightning. 
w.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_the_truth_about_voter_fraud/]Policy Brief on the Truth About &#8220;Voter Fraud&#8221; | Brennan Center for Justice

================================================

So, being as voter fraud is rare, rare, rare, what's the point of disenfranchising 10% of eligible voters and why the scare tactics?_


----------



## Rambunctious (Jul 31, 2012)

Voter fraud is real and if it didn't work people wouldn't attempt it. If anyone thinks it's OK because it helps his or her side of the isle you are wrong. Eventually both sides of the body politic will be infected with fraud and that will hurt all of us. Stand up against voter fraud and support voter ID or pay for it down the road.


----------



## Navy1960 (Jul 31, 2012)

Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often. 

Policy Brief on the Truth About &#8220;Voter Fraud&#8221; | Brennan Center for Justice


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 31, 2012)

BDBoop said:


> I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> 
> There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.



So here's the deal.  Unless they can be refuted by a credible source, Rottweiler has posted some substantial numbers backing up his O.P.

So I'm going to have to ask you to support how Voter I.D. disenfranchises huge numbers of legitimate voters.


----------



## oldernwiser (Jul 31, 2012)

Foxfyre said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> ...



According to Al Sharpton on last night's Block the Vote sermon on MSNBC, PA's new law will impact almost 260K voters who don't have the voter ID required. That's something like 9.1% of the registered voters in that state alone.

I don't agree with Sharpton as a rule, but it seems to me that affecting 260K potential voters to scare off the 9 fraudulent votes per million cast (WA state, 4 votes in 10 million per Ohio's study) can only be considered an effort to keep voters away from polls. 

If there's a real problem impacting our election process, where is the data to show it's impact? If we accept that there are 9 frauds per million votes, in a state like Fla we're talking about less than 3 wrongfully cast votes in an election where they get 100% turnout. How many hanging chads were there in the Bush election?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 31, 2012)

BDBoop said:


> I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> 
> There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.



Correct. 

There is no evidence fraud altered the outcome of any election. 



> Allegations of widespread fraud by malevolent voters are easy to make, but often prove to be inflated or inaccurate. Crying wolf when the claims are unsubstantiated distracts attention from real problems that need real solutions. Moreover, these claims are frequently used to justify policies  including restrictive photo identification rules  that could not solve the alleged wrongs, but that could well disenfranchise legitimate voters.
> 
> The Brennan Center carefully examines allegations of fraud to get at the truth behind the claims.
> 
> The Truth About Fraud





> Missouri, 2000
> 
> The 2000 election was hotly contested in Missouri, and various irregularities led to inflated claims of widespread fraud. Many of these fraud claims were later used to support the call for restrictive ID requirements. We examined each of the allegations of fraud by individual voters -- the only sort that ID could possibly address -- to uncover the truth behind the assertions.
> 
> ...



With a voter fraud rate of only *0.0003%*, there is no justification of requiring an ID to vote.


----------



## Vidi (Jul 31, 2012)

Rambunctious said:


> Voter fraud is real and if it didn't work people wouldn't attempt it. If anyone thinks it's OK because it helps his or her side of the isle you are wrong. Eventually both sides of the body politic will be infected with fraud and that will hurt all of us. Stand up against voter fraud and support voter ID or pay for it down the road.



Youre saying its real because people do it. Sorry, but thats circular logic.


----------



## Vidi (Jul 31, 2012)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> ...




I disagree. Heres why:

Every election cycle we have HUGE get out the vote campaigns. People are on every street corner registering people to vote ( well, not in same day registration states ). 

So I propose a compromise. A national law requiring a state issued ID be presented at the polls on the day of the election BUT, mandating same day registration in EVERY state.

Then the get out the vote campaigns could simply switch focus and get people their proper IDs.

But its not needed you say? I agree its not needed, BUT it completely takes this nonsense issue that rises every election AND gets same day registration to all Americans thus making it EASIER to vote in the long run.


----------



## oldernwiser (Aug 1, 2012)

Vidi said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



But......
Where is the evidence to support the claim that voter IDs are a necessary thing? If the best evidence of wrongdoing is that 9 votes per million cast are incorrect in some way (and that is the absolute highest number I could find), then there would seem to me to be another issue involved here than potential voter fraud. 

Here's another way to see this point - lets assume the worst cast, 9 bogus votes per million. The population of Florida is 19,057,542 as of July 2011 per the US Census. If the *entire population* of Florida could vote, this would result in 171 bad votes cast. Hardly a deciding factor in any election. More realistically, Florida has some 11 million registered voters. If as many as HALF showed up to cast a vote, statistically there might be as many as 50 bad votes. In the whole state. 

The fraud being perpetrated here seems to be the one where our legislators are asking us to believe that making voting harder for hundreds of thousands (which would equate to millions nationally) is better than letting 50 bad votes get by and that whole elections depend on those 50 votes.


----------



## Vidi (Aug 1, 2012)

oldernwiser said:


> Vidi said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...




There is no evidence. Rampant voter fraud is a myth. But its used as a political club every election cycle.

I say remove the weapon, make a "compromise" to get it and come out politically ahead on the other side.

Look if we allow for voter ID but provide IDs for all voters, then we lose nothing. If we also demand the compromise of same day voter registration in all states that have voter ID, we gain larger voter turnouts, which invariably favor the progessives. If it DIDNT, then the far right radicals wouldnt be working so diligently to try to disenfranchise voters with voter ID laws, would they? They see the political gain in keeping people from voting.

Turn it on them. Give them what they want by demanding something in return. If they say no, they lose. If they say yes, they lose.

And all we have to do to end the fight is offer up the compromise.


----------



## oldernwiser (Aug 1, 2012)

Vidi said:


> oldernwiser said:
> 
> 
> > Vidi said:
> ...



Ummm... there's so many ways that blows up I'm having a hard time listing them all...

New voters would need new cards for every election...

Do voters who misplace their cards lose their right to cast a vote?

The idea itself would need 100% turnout on this one election in order to ensure that every voter had an ID. When was the last time you saw 100% turnout?

Any way you look at it, the "compromise" would fail to provide 100% of the registered voters an ID that was guaranteed to be accurate at the time of the election.

There is a built-in way to deter voter fraud - and it's been working pretty well. When a person registers to vote, they must provide either a driver's license (or state issued ID) number, or their social security number. You might not have an ID, but a valid citizen in this country has to have a SSN. It's an optional field on the registration form - you aren't required to provide the info. 

As it turns out, when votes are challenged, this is the field that's checked. No entry means there's no way to validate the ballot, and it's chucked. If there's still a need to challenge, the numbers provided can be verified so that a valid voter can be traced to the district. It works. We don't have to change anything.

Look, it's just plain illogical to think that there could ever be an unbeatable system that would ensure no voter fraud whatsoever. The data presented - .00009% worst case - ought to be seen as a testament as to how well our current system does it's job and minimizes government intrusion at the same time (something I thought Republicans wanted).


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 1, 2012)

Voter fraud is a myth, as the DOJ in Florida has decided.

However, there is nothing wrong with requiring ID.


----------



## oldernwiser (Aug 1, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Voter fraud is a myth, as the DOJ in Florida has decided.
> 
> However, there is nothing wrong with requiring ID.



Except, by filling in the field on my voter reg form with my license number (or SSN), I have sufficiently identified myself as a valid voter by giving voting authorities a way to find me and verify for themselves my right to vote if they need to.

Requiring ID shifts the burden of proof back to me every time I vote. Why register in that case?


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2012)

Navy1960 said:


> Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
> Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
> 
> 
> ...



Except that, there is NO fee in any capacity. The ID's are given free if someone doesn't already have one (and who on God's green earth does not already have an ID of some kind?!?!?). So this is a false accusation by the left. The question is, why does the left insist on making these false accusations and encouraging voter fraud?


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> Voter fraud is just another scare tactic and that's it!
> 
> So, being as voter fraud is rare, rare, rare, what's the point of disenfranchising 10% of eligible voters and why the scare tactics?



That's why Madison, WI had a turn out of 110% participation for the Scott Walker re-call election, right? Sorry chief, but if every single eligible voter turned out, the most you could possibly have is 100% voter turn out. *The fact that Madison, WI had a 110% PROVES beyond a shadow of a doubt that the left is actively and heavily engaged in voter fraud.*

By the way, what is "scary" about having to show id at the polls? Unless of course, you either A.) involved in voter fraud, or B.) wanted by the authorities

Why is the left so afraid to have accurate, secure voting in America? I can only conclude that they know they will lose just about every election without cheating. If I'm wrong, please, someone give me a rational explanation. Georgia statistics prove that voting actually INCREASED significantly for minorities after they required identification to ensure there was no voter fraud.


----------



## Jackson (Aug 1, 2012)

oldernwiser said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Al Sharpton could pull numbers out of a hat.  Where did he get this information and how well documented is it?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 1, 2012)

Your opinion, Rott, is not proof.  Give the evidence, please, from credible public sources about Madison's "110%".



Rottweiler said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > Voter fraud is just another scare tactic and that's it!
> ...


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2012)

oldernwiser said:


> Ummm... there's so many ways that blows up I'm having a hard time listing them all...
> 
> New voters would need new cards for every election...



Ummm.... just like new drivers need a new drivers license? Wow, what an injustice! God forbid!



oldernwiser said:


> There is no evidence. Rampant voter fraud is a myth. But its used as a political club every election cycle.



Voter fraud is a fact. Madison, WI just had a 110% voter turn out in the Scott Walker re-call election. Enough said.



oldernwiser said:


> Do voters who misplace their cards lose their right to cast a vote?



Do drivers who misplace their cards lose their right to drive? Or do they just go get a replacement? The left is making some really desperate "arguments" to ensure voter fraud continues. I wonder why that is?



oldernwiser said:


> Any way you look at it, the "compromise" would fail to provide 100% of the registered voters an ID that was guaranteed to be accurate at the time of the election.



And you base this on _what_? Considering 99.999999999% of America already has proper ID (drivers license, ID card, etc.), you'd be hard pressed to find a handful of people in any city that requires a special card. Getting them one in time for ANY election would be about as difficult as pouring a bowl of cereal.



oldernwiser said:


> There is a built-in way to deter voter fraud - and it's been working pretty well. When a person registers to vote, they must provide either a driver's license (or state issued ID) number, or their social security number. You might not have an ID, but a valid citizen in this country has to have a SSN. It's an optional field on the registration form - you aren't required to provide the info.



Yes, and Democrats have been providing SSN's of dead people, fake people, and ineligible people for decades and decades now. So it's time we have a PHOTO ID to ensure the person registering is, in fact, who they are claiming to be.



oldernwiser said:


> Look, it's just plain illogical to think that there could ever be an unbeatable system that would ensure no voter fraud whatsoever.



Great attitude! Lets allow voter fraud by claiming there is no way to stop it all. Unfortunately, that is just your opinion. While the facts prove that it can be 100% fraud free by taking the proper steps.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 1, 2012)

Rott, produce your evidence, please.


----------



## Navy1960 (Aug 1, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Navy1960 said:
> 
> 
> > Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
> ...



With the exception of those  fees needed to aquire those documents   and here, I'll give you an  example. 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjySbloc7zA]97-Year-Old Arizona Woman Disenfranchised by Voter ID Law - YouTube[/ame]

While I appreciate the  need to combat voter fraud  and it is not  just a left or right thing as the  Sec. of State of  Indiana will tell you who was recently convicted on voter fraud counts  and he is a  (R).  the instances of  voter fraud  overall do not support  the  need for such laws and of course  I would be willing to change my mind on that if  I could see data that would support it otherwise.   I just happen to  think its just as wrong to keep Americans, good an honest , and decent people  like the one in the video there,  from voting as it is to try and keep a small number of people from committing fraud.    I have no real issue with IDs in general and  have said as much many times , and tend to feel that if the intention here were to simply have an ID to vote then the process would be uniform and simple and totally free from start to finish which it clearly is not.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 1, 2012)

Rott has not produced any verifiable, public objective evidence of 110% voting in Madison.


----------



## Intense (Aug 1, 2012)

We all seem to have strong opinions on what we think is right here. The bottom line here should be the Integrity of the Election Process. Personally, I don't care who pays for the ID, but we All need to have it. For anyone to be receiving any kind of State or Federal Aid or to use Banking, Credit, even Prescription Services, without it, is a joke. For those that need extra help getting their house in order, provide the service. Once it is fixed, that should be the end of it. Special Services or accommodations in those that still fail, should be case by case, and well reasoned. I'm against Federal ID's being Mandatory, because the Fed has a problem with Integrity, and will hand them out like candy, obstructing the States from doing their job in qualifying applicants. No One is going to find much, when they refuse to investigate. The game has been going on for Decades, and it's old. Refusing to face the problem, while denying it, is Catch-22.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 1, 2012)

I'm still pleasantly waiting for BDBoop to back up her assertion that huge amounts of voters will be disenfranchised if Voter ID is the rule.  Of course I am pretty sure than she cannot back that up since there seems to be no evidence that ANYBODY is unable to get a photo ID that is required for just about everything including many services utilized by our poorest citizens.

I agree with Intense that those states requiring Voter ID can easily provide them free to those who absolutely cannot afford to pay  a nominal amount to get one.  Or better yet, the folks who are so opposed to Voter ID because something might not be allowed to vote if they don't have a photo ID should pony up the cash and help them out.  That would be the compassionate thing to do would it not?

I'll be quite happy to pledge a few bucks to help pay for a photo ID for those who absolutely cannot afford to get one.    How many people in the country who would vote can't afford one?   Ten?


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Aug 1, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Here are the facts related to voter fraud:
> 
> People seemingly voting after they've been dead for years.



You mean like this Republican right here:Pinal County supervisor hopeful John Enright quits
???

There's an easy fix to that. Remove dead voters from the rolls.



> Drug kingpins buying votes from poor people to sway elections. Non-citizens being bussed to the polls and coached on how to vote.


.
Those aren't even sentences.


----------



## Rambunctious (Aug 1, 2012)

Vidi said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > Voter fraud is real and if it didn't work people wouldn't attempt it. If anyone thinks it's OK because it helps his or her side of the isle you are wrong. Eventually both sides of the body politic will be infected with fraud and that will hurt all of us. Stand up against voter fraud and support voter ID or pay for it down the road.
> ...



I don't care if the logic is circular, triangular, or square it's still logic and logic and honesty is what is sorely missing in this debate.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Aug 1, 2012)

Rambunctious said:


> Vidi said:
> 
> 
> > Rambunctious said:
> ...



You don't even know what circular logic means, do you?


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2012)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > Here are the facts related to voter fraud:
> ...



Sadly, the left keeps adding them back to the rolls....


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Aug 1, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...



So far the only evidence presented in this thread of an actual vote being cast on behalf of a dead voter was done by a Republican.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2012)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > Here are the facts related to voter fraud:
> ...



Those aren't even sentences?!?! Actually, those are clear, proper sentences. I'm guessing you have nothing to refute those facts and as such, are desperately looking to disregard them? Please correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2012)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > OohPooPahDoo said:
> ...



Then you and the rest of the liberals should be 100% behind ending voter fraud. Strangely though, none of you are... wonder why? Logic would dictate the only people opposing ensuring voting integrity are those behind voter fraud.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 1, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...



Good point.  If Republicans are the worst villains in trying to manipulate and rig and steal elections, you would think the Democrats and other leftists would be screaming for Voter ID from the rooftops as well as other voter issues reform.

But it seems to be mostly the Republicans and others on the right who want to tighten or reform the rules to ensure fair and honest elections.

Interesting isn't it.


----------



## onecut39 (Aug 2, 2012)

Voter ID is the poster child for a solution in search of a problem.  There is almost no voter fraud.  If it were such a rampant problem we would have the courts flooded with cases.  We have almost none. Certainly common mistakes result in more erroneous votes cast than fraudulent ones.  

As opposition mounts the Republicans are now reduced to saying that everyone already has ID so what is the problem?  Good question.

There is the distinction of voter registration fraud vs actual fraudulent voting.  Registration fraud rarely results in a fraudulent vote.  To state that it does either represents ignorance of how voting works or simply a desire to deceive.

To get enough fraudulent votes to matter is a really daunting task.  It can occur only where there is rampant corruption, places like Chicago in the fifties where the Daily machine had control of precincts.  It is labor intensive and it is illegal.  Unless you are quite sure of yourself you just may go to jail.

Voter fraud is just too much trouble and fraught with risk for the reward involved.

So what's a sleazy politician to do?  Easy!  Suppression.  That is the wave of the future.  It is easy.  It is legal.  In fact you can get the justice system to work for you by passing laws that make it more difficult to vote.  Pass a voter ID law.  Now all you have to do is make the rules and utilize just a little imagination.  Just a few targeted rules and regulation can get you better results than fraud ever could.

Of course it really helps if you have your party in office to implement things.  Little things.  Limit the availability of the ID process.  Have it done at as few places as possible so folks have to go a long ways.  This will cut down the number of old people, young people and those without transportation.  (sound like the democratic base?)  Restrict your hours for issuance. It really works wonders if people come to get an ID and the office is closed. They probably won't come back.  By all means make the process from application to issuance as long as possible.

Then come election time there are other creative things you can do.  Limit the number of polling places in poor and young areas.  Make sure there are lines.  Young folks are very impatient and it is difficult for old folks to stand around that long. Maybe it will be possible to arrange things so these lines must be outside. Who knows god may grant you a snow or rainstorm.  Either forbid or discourage same day registration.  Again, difficult is better.

In my state the GOP is making noises about requiring students to vote in their home districts. This tells you what it is all really about.  Not only their with state photo ID but in their home district and who cares how far that is from their school.

Voter fraud?  That is so..................yesterday.  Suppression, that is the name of the game.


----------



## WillowTree (Aug 2, 2012)

BDBoop said:


> I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> 
> There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.



Why is it you get to decide "what he meant to say." ????


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 2, 2012)

Because no has said, with any demonstrable evidence (opinions are not evidence), that significant fraud by either party has occurred.

My opinion is that voting is a moral obligation, and that going and getting a cost-free ID to meet requirements is not onerous.


----------



## Full-Auto (Aug 2, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Because no has said, with any demonstrable evidence (opinions are not evidence), that significant fraud by either party has occurred.
> 
> My opinion is that voting is a moral obligation, and that going and getting a cost-free ID to meet requirements is not onerous.



LOL   

Nope, a thousand extra votes, more then voters being the norm


No evidence at all.

2004 was st governors race.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 2, 2012)

Then give a credible, objective link or politely give the argument up.

Full, folks are saying things without any support: does not cut it.



Full-Auto said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Because no has said, with any demonstrable evidence (opinions are not evidence), that significant fraud by either party has occurred.
> ...


----------



## BDBoop (Aug 2, 2012)

onecut39 said:


> Voter ID is the poster child for a solution in search of a problem.  There is almost no voter fraud.  If it were such a rampant problem we would have the courts flooded with cases.  We have almost none. Certainly common mistakes result in more erroneous votes cast than fraudulent ones.
> 
> As opposition mounts the Republicans are now reduced to saying that everyone already has ID so what is the problem?  Good question.
> 
> ...



Excellent post.


----------



## syrenn (Aug 2, 2012)

onecut39 said:


> Voter ID is the poster child for a solution in search of a problem.  There is almost no voter fraud.  If it were such a rampant problem we would have the courts flooded with cases.  We have almost none. Certainly common mistakes result in more erroneous votes cast than fraudulent ones.
> 
> As opposition mounts the Republicans are now reduced to saying that everyone already has ID so what is the problem?  Good question.
> 
> ...




Fraud is fraud. 

It does not matter if there is "almost none"


----------



## WillowTree (Aug 2, 2012)

No fraud. No supression.. now that's a compromise. clean and simple.


----------



## Intense (Aug 2, 2012)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > Here are the facts related to voter fraud:
> ...



I totally agree with you. There is no room for corruption in the Election System, from any source.


----------



## onecut39 (Aug 2, 2012)

syrenn said:


> onecut39 said:
> 
> 
> > Voter ID is the poster child for a solution in search of a problem.  There is almost no voter fraud.  If it were such a rampant problem we would have the courts flooded with cases.  We have almost none. Certainly common mistakes result in more erroneous votes cast than fraudulent ones.
> ...



If there is almost no fraud only a damn fool would spend the millions of bucks necessary to fully implement voter ID.

It would appear they are getting something else for their money.


----------



## Vidi (Aug 2, 2012)

syrenn said:


> onecut39 said:
> 
> 
> > Voter ID is the poster child for a solution in search of a problem.  There is almost no voter fraud.  If it were such a rampant problem we would have the courts flooded with cases.  We have almost none. Certainly common mistakes result in more erroneous votes cast than fraudulent ones.
> ...




Actually it does.

One has to take into account the cost of the fix versus the cost of the actual problem. 

If there were 500 cases of voter fraud every four years, but the margin is always more than a million votes, then those 500 cost us nothing and the cost of fixing for those few cases would be cost prohibitive.

BUT, if voter fraud is rampant, in the millions, then the cost of NOT fixing the problem would be greater.


----------



## oldernwiser (Aug 3, 2012)

Vidi said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > onecut39 said:
> ...



Here's where the numbers come back to bite. A worst case of 9 errant votes for every million votes cast means that in a presidential election with an awesome turnout of 250 million ballots, 2250 of those votes could be statistically suspect. That's an average of 45 votes per state. 

Miniscule at best. Hardly an election decider in even the closest of races.

On the other hand, a voter ID card could be faked with moderate skill. Corruption of officials isn't unheard of either. Either way, there is nothing to stop a determined person from defrauding the election process.

I'm all for solving a problem when one exists. But if it ain't broke, leave it alone. Our current registration system has held the impact of POTENTIAL fraud to such a low statistical number that voter fraud is a non-issue.

As alluded to earlier, election manipulation is another story and has more to do with the political parties involved than with the electorate.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 3, 2012)

There is no voter fraud problem of any minor let major significance.

Recognizing that fact does not mean that having a valid Voter ID is somehow a bad idea.


----------



## onecut39 (Aug 3, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> There is no voter fraud problem of any minor let major significance.
> 
> Recognizing that fact does not mean that having a valid Voter ID is somehow a bad idea.




It is if it ends up suppressing the vote.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 3, 2012)

There is a solution that would not cost the state much, if anything at all, and will fix the problem.

1.  Expect people to get themselves to the county or city clerk's office to register to vote.  They will need positive ID and some evidence (a utility bill or the mortgage papers for their new home or whatever) that they live in their precinct in order to do that.  

2.  Expect them to register to vote at least two weeks (four to six would be better) prior to election day in order to be able to vote.

3.  Assign each voter the proper precinct and have them show positive ID when they check in there to vote on election day.

4.  If they move out of their precinct, they will need to go re-register to vote.

This was the system in almost all of the country for a long, long time, and though a few dead people still managed to vote before there was photo I.D., the system was about as honest and secure as one could make it among large groups of imperfect human beings.

Also we had a much better informed electorate because people who really cared were the ones who took the responsibility to register and then get themselves to the polls on election day.  There were still a few absentee ballots for those who could not be in their precinct on election day, but most of us arranged our schedules so we would be sure to be able to vote.

Voting is a privilege of a free people and should never been done casually or in ignorance.  Let's go back to a system where people are expected to take the responsibility to exercise their right to vote intentionally, and get away from this nonsense of thinking voting is noble even when people don't have a clue who they are voting for or why or when they have been bribed or paid to vote.


----------



## Borillar (Aug 3, 2012)

BDBoop said:


> I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> 
> There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.



Are there really huge numbers of legitimate voters that have no form of ID? I had an ID card starting back in High School. I've had to get state issued driver's licenses, a military ID, a passport, even work ID's. My parents had ID's and my kids have ID's. Why is having an ID a big deal?

That said, is this really a big issue, or more of a solution looking for a problem? How many cases of validated voter fraud have been tried?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 3, 2012)

That would be the voters' decisions.

There is no constitutional, statutory prohibition to requiring one.



onecut39 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > There is no voter fraud problem of any minor let major significance.
> ...


----------



## Intense (Aug 3, 2012)

Navy1960 said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > Navy1960 said:
> ...



Looking at that, She seems like a Special Circumstance that should be straightened out through the Court. It seems like something a Judge should be able to easily resolve.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 7, 2012)

More overwhelming evidence that the left is LYING about the voter fraud problem:

*160 COUNTIES HAVE MORE REGISTERED VOTERS THAN RESIDENTS*

True the Vote Sends Notice to 160 Counties It Says Have More Than 100 Percent Voter Registration | TheBlaze.com


----------



## theDoctorisIn (Aug 7, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> More overwhelming evidence that the left is LYING about the voter fraud problem:
> 
> *160 COUNTIES HAVE MORE REGISTERED VOTERS THAN RESIDENTS*
> 
> True the Vote Sends Notice to 160 Counties It Says Have More Than 100 Percent Voter Registration | TheBlaze.com



People die all the time. There's no "automatic" way for people who die to be taken off voter rolls.

There's no big conspiracy, it's just a simple fact. People die - that's why there are more registered voters than residents.


----------



## auditor0007 (Aug 7, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> ...



There is no evidence of any real fraud.  That is the problem.  If you could produce real facts as to where voter fraud has occurred, then please show us.  I really don't have an issue with requiring an ID, so long as there is some system in place to allow people who forgot or lost their ID to vote by signing an affidavit.  So long as every eligible voter is guaranteed the right to vote, states can require whatever they want as far as ID's are concerned.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 7, 2012)

Borillar said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> ...



Maybe fewer than some of us think.  A lot more than those opposing Voter I.D. will admit:



> Twelve thousand noncitizens registered to vote in Colorado; apparently 5,000 of those voted in 2010. A recent report in North Carolina by James O'Keefe's Project Veritas (of ACORN-undercover expose` fame) compared records of registered voters to prospective jurors disqualified due to noncitizenship, but who then voted in North Carolina in 2010. The State of Florida is suing the Department of Homeland Security to obtain a list of noncitizens in order to purge the state's voter rolls before the 2012 election, and was just sued in return by the Barack Obama-Eric Holder Department of Justice with a lawsuit for purging its rolls, which is required by federal law.
> 
> [Peter Roff: Obama Administration's Texas Decision Invites Voter Fraud]
> 
> ...


----------



## Intense (Aug 7, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> There is no voter fraud problem of any minor let major significance.
> 
> Recognizing that fact does not mean that having a valid Voter ID is somehow a bad idea.



If there was, with under reporting and discouragement from reporting it, you would never know.


----------



## Intense (Aug 7, 2012)

That argument becomes much harder to make after reading a discussion of the 2008 Minnesota Senate race in "Who's Counting?", a new book by conservative journalist John Fund and former Bush Justice Department official Hans von Spakovsky. Although the authors cover the whole range of voter fraud issues, their chapter on Minnesota is enough to convince any skeptic that there are times when voter fraud not only exists but can be critical to the outcome of a critical race.

In the '08 campaign, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman was running for re-election against Democrat Al Franken. It was impossibly close; on the morning after the election, after 2.9 million people had voted, Coleman led Franken by 725 votes.

Franken and his Democratic allies dispatched an army of lawyers to challenge the results. After the first canvass, Coleman's lead was down to 206 votes. That was followed by months of wrangling and litigation. In the end, Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. He was sworn into office in July 2009, eight months after the election.

During the controversy a conservative group called Minnesota Majority began to look into claims of voter fraud. Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, the group identified 1,099 felons -- all ineligible to vote -- who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race.

Minnesota Majority took the information to prosecutors across the state, many of whom showed no interest in pursuing it. But Minnesota law requires authorities to investigate such leads. And so far, Fund and von Spakovsky report, 177 people have been convicted -- not just accused, but convicted -- of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial. "The numbers aren't greater," the authors say, "because the standard for convicting someone of voter fraud in Minnesota is that they must have been both ineligible, and 'knowingly' voted unlawfully." The accused can get off by claiming not to have known they did anything wrong.

York: When 1,099 felons vote in race won by 312 ballots | WashingtonExaminer.com


----------



## Intense (Aug 7, 2012)

According to an investigation conducted by Horace Cooper, adjunct fellow with Project 21, voter fraud research conducted in New York shows that targeted victims include public housing residents, college students, the semi-literate, a deaf man, the chronically ill, and non-English speakers.

Horace Cooper (Project 21)"Essentially what we've done is shown that it is a lie to claim that if you require ID, it hurts poor people, or it hurts seniors, or any other sort of disenfranchised groups," Cooper tells OneNewsNow. "It turns out that those are the people that are most often targeted and have their votes snatched from them as a result of voter fraud."

Voter fraud plots prey upon the weakest members of society. They violate the public's trust, erode faith and confidence in the democratic process, and ultimately disenfranchise men and women -- both rich and poor -- whose votes should be rightfully counted.

"This is the irony," Cooper remarks. "[Liberals] claim that pushing voter ID is anti-the least among us, but it turns out the facts show otherwise. If you don't have voter ID, it is the least among us who are most often manipulated, who are most often taken advantage of, and who most often have their rights of self-determination snatched right from under them."

As for the allegations about black Americans being unfairly penalized by voter integrity measures like voter ID laws, Cooper notes that black voter turnout increased in Georgia after the state adopted a voter ID law.

Who do voter ID laws really hurt? (OneNewsNow.com)


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 7, 2012)

Given the overwhelming evidence that anybody who wants a photo ID can easily obtain one in this country, the advantage to every citizen in having a photo ID, and the extremely few people who would want one and can't afford one could be so easily accommodated; there is only one fact that matters remaining.

The ONLY ones disadvantaged by Photo ID are those who intend to commit voter fraud.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 7, 2012)

theDoctorisIn said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > More overwhelming evidence that the left is LYING about the voter fraud problem:
> ...



Really? We can automatically impose the death tax on their families, automatically cut off Social Security checks to the deceased, and automatically ensure the federal government gets a slice of their estate, but we can't automatically "take them off the voter roll"?

That's funny - considering there are death certificates issued and todays sophisticated IT systems, you would think the entire thing could be automated and executed within seconds. That is unless, of course, you're a liberal who desperately needs the deceased to still be on the "voter rolls" because you make up a mere 21% of the voters in America.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 7, 2012)

theDoctorisIn said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > More overwhelming evidence that the left is LYING about the voter fraud problem:
> ...



By the way, if this were just some death issue, then why wouldn't 3,000+ counties have more voters than residents? Do 2,900+ counties have residents that *never* *die*?!?!? Kind of throws your theory right out of the door, doesn't it?


----------



## Vidi (Aug 7, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...




I grew up in St Louis Mo. I havent lived there for two decades. But my father, who still lives in the house I first registered in at 18 years of age, still gets my voter registration card. I havent lived at that address ( or that county for that matter ) for nearly 25 years.

When I moved to Wisconsin just before the 1996 elections, I registered in Wisconsin at my mothers address. I lived threre for two months while I found a decent apartment for myself. She still lives at the same address and gets voter registration reminders for me at that address.

The point is, I am on the "rolls" in three states, because they dont freaking purge thier rolls. But I only vote in the state I actually live in.

That is WHY so many counties have more people on their rolls then actual voters. They do a piss poor job ( because it would RAISE SPENDING ) of purging the voter rolls.

And* there are 3033 counties in the United States. When they say 2900+, they mean ALMOST ALL.* So one would be forced to believe that EVERY SINGLE COUNTY IN THE COUNTRY has rampant voter fraud EVERY election.  

REALLY?????? With only 311 legal accusations since 2002, and only 51 which could be claimed as convictions( though the real number seems to be closer to only about 26 ) you would have us believe MILLIONS of incidents of voter fraud are being perpetrated EVERY election in EVERY county in the country?

Its a very simple explaination, that WONT get fixed by Voter ID cards, and one party tries to turn into a national debate every election cycle because the numbers make it look like theres an issue, when really there isnt.

In other words, stop getting all up in arms about pretend stuff.


----------



## Intense (Aug 7, 2012)

Vidi said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > theDoctorisIn said:
> ...



I don't see a problem with a Computer Program connecting Voter Registration with your Current Address through Your Current State ID, be it a Drivers License, or ID Card. When you move, you turn it in, when applying for a Current ID. It is no big deal.
The Integrity of the Elections is the priority, not the inconvenience of some over paid worker having to do something productive. If it's a mess, it surely needs to be cleaned up. Who's to say, people are not taking advantage of those Voter ID's? You would not even know if Ballots were being cast in your own name in those States you don't even live.


----------



## Vidi (Aug 7, 2012)

Intense said:


> Vidi said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...



Oh I am not opposed to a National ID card or even State Voter ID requirements. As I stated earlier in the thread Im actually in favor of them if for no other reason to end this argument about so called rampant voter fraud. 

I just feel the need to correct people when they post such obviously incorrect and biased ramblings.

See Quatum Windbags current avatar for further explaination on my motives lol


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 7, 2012)

I find this GOP voter fraud scare tactic has pathetic.
I posted those one and I'll do it again. Maybe, just maybe some of the voter fraud screamers will finally get a clue, that they are being led by the nose by their own party (again).

_*Policy Brief on the Truth About &#8220;Voter Fraud&#8221;*

Summary

* Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare. 
* Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud. 
* Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct. 
* Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda. 
* Claims of voter fraud should be carefully tested before they become the basis for action.

Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare. Most citizens who take the time to vote offer their legitimate signatures and sworn oaths with the gravitas that this hard-won civic right deserves. Even for the few who view voting merely as a means to an end, however, voter fraud is a singularly foolish way to attempt to win an election. Each act of voter fraud risks five years in prison and a $10,000 fine - but yields at most one incremental vote. The single vote is simply not worth the price.

Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often._
Policy Brief on the Truth About &#8220;Voter Fraud&#8221; | Brennan Center for Justice


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 7, 2012)

*Pennsylvania acknowledges there is no evidence of voter fraud*

Read more: Pennsylvania acknowledges there is no evidence of voter fraud - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Yet, almost 800,000 will not be allowed to vote in PA this November thanks to a law passed the the GOP in Pennsylvania!  Voter suppression, damn straight it is!  I thought this was America!


----------



## P@triot (Aug 7, 2012)

Vidi said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > theDoctorisIn said:
> ...



First of all, liberals *love* to spend money. Liberals *live* to spend money. Remember - government spending stimulates the economy? Creates jobs? Solves all problems? We've been hearing liberals scream this for 4 straight years now. So why the opposition on spending money to prevent voter fraud?

Second, I believe you only vote in the state you live in. But what you fail to understand, is that it is very likely (especially in Wisconsin) that some idiot liberal is voting for you.

Third, all of your excuses mean nothing at the end of the day. It's almost as asinine as me saying that Aurora, Colorado doesn't matter because only 71 people were shot and not 75. I don't care how "small" liberal propaganda claims the voter fraud issue is - any fraud is unacceptable. One case of voter fraud supporting conservative candidates is unacceptable.

The fact that liberals are "concerned" about spending money on this just shows with glaring evidence that they want the fraud to continue. We're $16 trillion in debt because of liberals, they keep yelling for us to spend even more, but they are suddenly fiscally responsible when it comes to spending money on preventing voter fraud?!?!?


----------



## P@triot (Aug 7, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> *Pennsylvania acknowledges there is no evidence of voter fraud*
> 
> Read more: Pennsylvania acknowledges there is no evidence of voter fraud - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
> 
> Yet, almost 800,000 will not be allowed to vote this November thanks to a law passed the the GOP in Pennsylvania!  Voter suppression, damn straight it is!  I thought this was America!



Nah, it stopped being America when progressives like you brought pure communism to our shores. But don't worry though, the Tea Party is seriously kicking your ass and we're taking back America. This will be America again (just be patient son)!


----------



## Vidi (Aug 7, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Vidi said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...




Your entire post is laced with biased and not based on reality.

Please wash clean your biased, READ what I actually posted and then respond to THAT. Do not go on some completely UNRELATED crazy rant that has nothing at all to do with what I posted.

Oh and I support Voter ID. Maybe you should pay attention.


----------



## Vidi (Aug 7, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > *Pennsylvania acknowledges there is no evidence of voter fraud*
> ...




Again your post is filled with biased insanity with no foothold in reality.

If you wish to take part in reasonable conversation, you will need to adjust your hatred down a few notches and realize, that the "pure communism" you speak of is non-existant and only a tool used by those who wish to control you.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 7, 2012)

What the hell is wrong with these people are they that fucking naive to be so easily led by their party.  Even the GOP can't prove even small scale voter fraud, much less minuscule voter fraud.
But it has been proved that the voter fraud scare is a fraud.
Why do these people hate the values that established the USA? One man/woman, one vote! No, they'd rather screw people out of their right to vote legally as guaranteed by the Constitution.


----------



## Vidi (Aug 7, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> What the hell is wrong with these people are they that fucking naive to be so easily led by their party.  Even the GOP can't prove even small scale voter fraud, much less minuscule voter fraud.
> But it has been proved that the voter fraud scare is a fraud.
> Why do these people hate the values that established the USA? One man/woman, one vote! No, they'd rather screw people out of their right to vote legally as guaranteed by the Constitution.



There is no right to vote. It is not a Constitutionally enumerated right.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 9, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> I find this GOP voter fraud scare tactic has pathetic.
> I posted those one and I'll do it again. Maybe, just maybe some of the voter fraud screamers will finally get a clue, that they are being led by the nose by their own party (again).
> 
> _*Policy Brief on the Truth About Voter Fraud*
> ...



That's why Madison, WI had a 110% voter turn out for the Scott Walker recall election, right? Voter fraud is rampant by liberals and you know it. Lying about something over and over is not going to convince us that what you say is true. That only works on you weak minded liberals.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 9, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> What the hell is wrong with these people are they that fucking naive to be so easily led by their party.  Even the GOP can't prove even small scale voter fraud, much less minuscule voter fraud.
> But it has been proved that the voter fraud scare is a fraud.
> Why do these people hate the values that established the USA? One man/woman, one vote! No, they'd rather screw people out of their right to vote legally as guaranteed by the Constitution.



How exactly is someone getting "screwed out of their right to vote"?!?! What the HELL is wrong with YOU?!?! The fact that you think people should be able to walk in and cast votes without first proving they are a registered voter speaks volumes.

edited who wants the voter fraud because you know that America will never accept your communist ideology.

This is as fucking stupid as someone trying to make a case that there should be no officials on a basketball court, no referees on a football field, and no police officers in the world. It's just an asinine argument to make. You're screaming you don't want legal and fair elections held. Unfuckingbelievable...


----------



## P@triot (Aug 9, 2012)

Vidi said:


> Your entire post is laced with biased and not based on reality.
> 
> Please wash clean your biased, READ what I actually posted and then respond to THAT. Do not go on some completely UNRELATED crazy rant that has nothing at all to do with what I posted.
> 
> Oh and I support Voter ID. Maybe you should pay attention.



In other words, you can't dispute one thing I just said so it's time to change the conversation, right? Where is the "biased"? What is not "based on reality"?

According to liberals, nothing stimulates the economy like government spending, government programs, and government employees. So let's break this down:

Those without ID would need proper processing and free ID's provided to them.


Someone would need to create these forms (ie the template)... STIMULUS!

We would need to print the forms (think of the paper the government would need to purchase from private industry and the toner the government would need to purchase from private industry).... STIMULUS!

Someone would need to process the forms in person.... STIMULUS!

We would need to create the ID template.... STIMULUS!

We would need to print the ID cards.... STIMULUS!

Somoeone would need to check ID at the polls..... STIMULUS!
My God, in _any_ other scenario, this is literally a liberal dream. It's federal spending - the solution to all problems (right? :lol). Except that, this spending would stop the voter fraud liberals need to win an election, so we can't have that.

The argument liberals are trying to make on this issue is just as stupid as someone saying that we shouldn't be allowed to investigate rape or murder. It's just an absurd case to make, which is why you guys are getting annihilated on this issue.


----------



## Truthmatters (Aug 9, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> What the hell is wrong with these people are they that fucking naive to be so easily led by their party.  Even the GOP can't prove even small scale voter fraud, much less minuscule voter fraud.
> But it has been proved that the voter fraud scare is a fraud.
> Why do these people hate the values that established the USA? One man/woman, one vote! No, they'd rather screw people out of their right to vote legally as guaranteed by the Constitution.



Its the same reason the talk about being all constitutionalistic and then try to distroy the post office which the founders WROTE into the constitution and were willing to pay for.


They are not the friends of this country or our constitution.


They are Norquist devotees who want this country dead


----------



## Al_Fundie (Aug 9, 2012)

Truthmatters said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > What the hell is wrong with these people are they that fucking naive to be so easily led by their party.  Even the GOP can't prove even small scale voter fraud, much less minuscule voter fraud.
> ...



Incorrect. The Constitution provides for the government building and maintaining postal roads, it says NOTHING about the Post Office.


----------



## Vidi (Aug 9, 2012)

Al_Fundie said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > kiwiman127 said:
> ...




Wow. Youre sitting at a computer, or you have a smart device in your hand. You cant fact check that before you post it?




> Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution, known as the Postal Clause or the Postal Power, empowers Congress "*To establish Post Offices *and post Roads".
> 
> Postal Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Vidi (Aug 9, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Vidi said:
> 
> 
> > Your entire post is laced with biased and not based on reality.
> ...



nothing stimulates the economy like government spending? Who the hell told you THAT? No liberal has EVER said that and I challenge you to provide a link to an actual liberal who actually said that. 

And its statements like that that prove your bias. hat is NOT a liberal stance, never has been, and never will be. It is however what Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity want you to believe. 

Youve also chosen to ignore the fact that I SUPPORT VOTER ID! Dont believe me? Go back through the thread and see where Ive said it at least twice before in this thread.

Lastly, I cant refute crazy talk. And even if I could, YOU made the assertions that Liberals love for and live for this or that. The burden of proof is on YOU to show us that you have some basis for this assertion.

which reminds me theres a need for another thread.


----------



## Vidi (Aug 9, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...



Youre making Federal Government assumptions about State and Local governments. I guess you just argued the Federal Government is more efficient than State and Local governments.


----------



## Vidi (Aug 9, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Vidi said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...



Im going to aswer whats in bolded here because I seem to have missed this earlier.

NONSENSE!!!!!!!!!


If someone were voting under MY name, then the Government would come after me for VOTER FRAUD!!!! Thats what YOU fail to understand.

So now, the *burden of proof* is upon YOU to find and post data about people who have been accused of voter fraud but it turns out that it was someone voting under their name.


----------



## Vidi (Aug 9, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> What the hell is wrong with these people are they that fucking naive to be so easily led by their party.  Even the GOP can't prove even small scale voter fraud, much less minuscule voter fraud.
> But it has been proved that the voter fraud scare is a fraud.
> Why do these people hate the values that established the USA? One man/woman, one vote! No, they'd rather screw people out of their right to vote legally as guaranteed by the Constitution.



Theyve been looking for their Willie Horton for years. Never found it. Never will.

The REAL problem is ELECTION fraud, not voter fraud.

I say we let them win this one though. Pass the voter ID laws and make getting the ID part of our get out the vote campaign.

Then we can turn our attention to THEIR election fraud.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 24, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> What the hell is wrong with these people are they that fucking naive to be so easily led by their party.  Even the GOP can't prove even small scale voter fraud, much less minuscule voter fraud.
> But it has been proved that the voter fraud scare is a fraud.
> Why do these people hate the values that established the USA? One man/woman, one vote! No, they'd rather screw people out of their right to vote legally as guaranteed by the Constitution.



With the internet today, there is no excuse for being as inaccurate as you are with this post....

*At least 44 states have seen charges or convictions for voter fraud* in the last 10 years, according to a vote fraud study from the Republican National Lawyers Association. Charges have included voter impersonation, vote buying, absentee ballot fraud and double voting. *In 2010, a Nebraska man was arrested after investigators said he submitted nearly 200 phony names during a drive for a minority voter registration group*. Last year, a *Mississippi NAACP official was convicted of fraudulently casting absentee ballots in the names of 10 people&#8212;four of whom were dead&#8212;after forensics matched her DNA to the envelope seals*.

TheBlaze Magazine Exclusive Report: Voter Fraud Threatens Your Vote | TheBlaze.com


----------



## theDoctorisIn (Aug 24, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > What the hell is wrong with these people are they that fucking naive to be so easily led by their party.  Even the GOP can't prove even small scale voter fraud, much less minuscule voter fraud.
> ...



Would any of those "voter fraud" cases have been prevented by voter ID laws?


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 25, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Where are your sources to back up your allegation? I posted a link to some concrete numbers.
> 
> Furthermore, why is your side of the aisle so *afraid* of this issue? If it stops even 1 vote that was fraudulent, I would think everyone would support that. Unless, of course, your the side behind the fraud.
> 
> ...


If you're so concerned about voter fraud, why haven't you said anything about the fact that we have only 4 companies that are "contracted" to total 80% of all the votes, in all the elections for the entire country?  All you need is access to one touch-screen voting machine and you can replace the "memory card" in less than a minute, which will affect the server on how it tabulates votes for each precinct.



> _eighty percent of all the ballots in America are tallied by four companies - Diebold, Election Systems & Software (ES&S), Sequoia Voting Systems and Hart InterCivic._


Why don't you talk about that?

Oh, I know why you don't talk about it. 



> _Three of the four companies have close ties to the Republican Party._


----------



## LoneLaugher (Aug 25, 2012)

Let's play a game to see who is capable of being honest.

If there are no new voter ID laws established prior to the election in November, how many cases of in person voter fraud do you think we will have? Using past elections as an indicator, how many people will be accused of and investigated for in person voter fraud.

Heck......lets assume that the worst fears of the GOP are realized, how many successful ( unknown. not detected ) cases of in person voter fraud do you THINK or GUESS we will have?

Now, lets allow all the new voter ID laws to be established. How many eligible voters, will fail to acquire the PROPER ID and be denied the opportunity to vote in the upcoming election?


Which number is larger?

Make an informed, logical decision regarding how we should proceed.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 25, 2012)

Why play the game though?  How many people who don't treat their high blood pressure or lower their cholesterol will have strokes or heart attacks.  Answer:  a relatively small number, but a number too high to take the risk.

How many people who drive too fast or run red lights will have car crashes?  Answer:  a relatively small number, but a number too high to take the risk.

How many people who go out in thunderstorms will be hit by lightning?  Answer:  a small number, but a number too high to not take precautions.

How many people will commit voter fraud with or without voter I.D.?  Answer:  a small number relative to the number of people who vote, but any fraud at all should not be tolerable.  A large number of New Mexico elections are decided by fewer than 500 votess.  How hard would it be to rig an important election if due care is not exerised?

The bottom line is, when matters involving food, shelter, transportation, or registration for most services requires photo I.D. these days, it is a hardship on nobody to require Voter I.D. as well.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Aug 25, 2012)

I don't wanna play that game............because I NEVER win! So let me just say a bunch of other meaningless stuff and see if I can bore the guy into going away. 

One citizen denied the opportunity to vote...........for whatever reason........no matter how trivial it seems to you............is not tolerable. 

Now......lets play that game and see how much sense your position makes.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

LoneLaugher said:


> Let's play a game to see who is capable of being honest.
> 
> If there are no new voter ID laws established prior to the election in November, how many cases of in person voter fraud do you think we will have? Using past elections as an indicator, how many people will be accused of and investigated for in person voter fraud.
> 
> ...



There is no way of knowing "how many successful ( unknown. not detected ) cases of in person voter fraud" there would be. My guess of 10's of thousands is no more ridiculous than TDM's claim of zero.
Are we in agreement that only citizens eligible to vote in a given location should be voting? What is wrong with requiring that voters prove their eligibility?
I am required to carry a state issued permit to carry a concealed weapon, but you're fine with that, aren't you?


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 25, 2012)

All citizens who do not register to vote or who do not show up at the assigned precinct or who do not use the assigned absentee ballot should be denied the opportunity to vote.  The great privilege of voting for our government leaders is something that should never be taken lightly, casually, or without due process to ensure the integrity of the system.

The privilege requires personal responsibility and initiative.  Nobody who can show that he or she is a citizen of the United States should be denied a photo I.D. but that is a separate issue.

Requiring a photo I.D. to vote is just one more method to help ensure a fair and honest election.  It is no more inconvenience than is the requirement to register to vote and/or to make the effort to vote, and the only logical reason anybody would object to it is to make it more easy to commit voter fraud.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

LoneLaugher said:


> I don't wanna play that game............because I NEVER win! So let me just say a bunch of other meaningless stuff and see if I can bore the guy into going away.
> 
> One citizen denied the opportunity to vote...........for whatever reason........no matter how trivial it seems to you............is not tolerable.
> 
> Now......lets play that game and see how much sense your position makes.



OK, One person denied the right to vote because someone has fraudulently voted already in place of him, is not tolerable.
When driving a car, carrying a concealed weapon, opening a bank account, cashing a check or applying for welfare, requires a photo ID, why shouldn't voting?


----------



## LoneLaugher (Aug 25, 2012)

Please.......ask that stupid question again. It has only been answered a thousand times here already. Pretend that you didn't read the answer.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

LoneLaugher said:


> Please.......ask that stupid question again. It has only been answered a thousand times here already. Pretend that you didn't read the answer.



It's never been answered here satisfactorily. Have at it.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Aug 25, 2012)

Bullshit.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

Link or offer your explanation, I don't much care, but a comment of "bullshit" is just bullshit.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

Is that crickets?


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

LoneLaugher said:


> Bullshit.



Bullshit = liberalese for "I got nothing."


----------



## Zoom-boing (Aug 25, 2012)

My son (special needs) just turned 19.  He printed off the voter registration form from the website, filled it out, mailed it.  The only personal information asked on the form, aside from name,  address and DOB was his DL# (he doesn't have one) or the last 4 of his SS#.    He got his voter registration within two weeks.  Hubs just took him down to the DMV Thurs.  30-40 min drive, waited till their number was called (waited approx 1.5 hours because that's how they run the DMV).  He took the following paperwork with him for proof:  his voter registration card, his SS card, his raised-seal BC, a tax bill with his name and address on it; hubs had his DL which they didn't even bother to look at.  He got a temp ID card which is good for 15 days and they run his name through the database to validate that his pic doesn't match another pic under a different name.  Hubs and son then went out to lunch, total time gone (including the drive there and back and lunch) was 4 hours.

If someone was going to fraudulently vote they'd do that when they registered.  Wouldn't requiring a photo ID prevent the fraudulently registered person from being able to vote?  Say someone registered a dead person ... filled out the form, mailed it in, got a voter card in the dead person's name. (btw, were I vote they have never, ever asked to see my voter reg. card, just had me sign the book).  Now that dead person is registered and without photo ID at the polls there's no way to know if that person voting is who they say they are (the dead person) and couldn't this be repeated many times over?  Wouldn't a photo ID stop registration/voter fraud?  Just kinda thinking out loud here.

When the DMV guy was looking over my son's paperwork, my son leans in and says to the guy "find any warrants yet?"    My kid is a hoot!


----------



## Zoom-boing (Aug 25, 2012)

Oh yeah ... my hubs never got his DL till he was 25 but when he turned 18 he went an got and ID card because he needed it for so many things ... and this was back in the late '70s.

All the people who will supposedly be disenfranchised by having to get a photo ID ...  how are they managing in life without one?  Do they not have any type of bank account or ever buy alcohol or smokes or cash any type of check?  Do you need a photo ID to get a cashier's check?  I can't figure that the numbers they're giving (is it 9% in PA?) for folks without DL means that those 9%(?) don't have any type of a photo ID right now.  

Oh and my son's ID was free of charge, he had to sign a form saying he didn't have any other type of valid photo ID and there was no charge.  Had he had to pay for it the cost was $13.50.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 25, 2012)

Zoom-boing said:


> Oh yeah ... my hubs never got his DL till he was 25 but when he turned 18 he went an got and ID card because he needed it for so many things ... and this was back in the late '70s.
> 
> All the people who will supposedly be disenfranchised by having to get a photo ID ...  how are they managing in life without one?  Do they not have any type of bank account or ever buy alcohol or smokes or cash any type of check?  Do you need a photo ID to get a cashier's check?  I can't figure that the numbers they're giving (is it 9% in PA?) for folks without DL means that those 9%(?) don't have any type of a photo ID right now.
> 
> Oh and my son's ID was free of charge, he had to sign a form saying he didn't have any other type of valid photo ID and there was no charge.  Had he had to pay for it the cost was $13.50.



I don't have any problem with people who can show they are indigent being provided free photo ID.  I don't mind my tax dollars going for that purpose.  But as you point out, you can be required to have photo ID to buy a plane ticket, to be served in a bar, to buy a bottle of wine, to buy a pack of cigarettes, to enter a courthouse or certain other venues, to drive any kind of motorized vehicle on a public road, to apply for a passport, to check a book out of a public library, to apply for food stamps, social security, or some other programs, to collect a welfare check, or simply because you fit a suspect's description and are detained momentarily by the police.

Seems to me that the very very few citizens who don't have a photo ID would be blessed by the requirement that they get one.   But I'm not buying the argument that tens of thousands of people would be disenfranchised by a requirement of Voter I.D.   It just won't happen,.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

Foxfyre said:


> Zoom-boing said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yeah ... my hubs never got his DL till he was 25 but when he turned 18 he went an got and ID card because he needed it for so many things ... and this was back in the late '70s.
> ...



But but but LoneLaugher says he has addressed that in the past, Foxy. It's apparently an off limits argument. 
I, personally, don't recall he, or anyone providing a cogent refutation of this argument and he refuses to link or restate his argument.
His comment is:


LoneLaugher said:


> Bullshit.



Sounds like he doesn't want to subject his argument to scrutiny. Whatcha think?


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 25, 2012)

Ernie S. said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Zoom-boing said:
> ...





"Bullshit" is code for "I have an absolutely breathtakingly marvelous astounding rebuttal for your comments, but I just can't quite seem to recall it at the moment."


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

He'll likely start quoting TDM soon.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 25, 2012)

Earlier in this thread I posted the results of two studies on voter fraud.  The conclusion is that a person is more likely to hit by lightening that voter fraud being committed.
The penalty for voter fraud are very stiff, $10,000 fine and jail time.  
This voter fraud scare is a fraud within its self. 
The League of Women's Voter estimates millions of legal voters will become disenfranchised. That is un-American.


----------



## Rozman (Aug 25, 2012)

If people spent half their time going about getting their paperwork together instead of bitching about
having to do this.They would have been done with this already.

The race card is the favorite card that the left likes to play.
Their second favorite is the victim card.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> Earlier in this thread I posted the results of two studies on voter fraud.  The conclusion is that a person is more likely to hit by lightening that voter fraud being committed.
> The penalty for voter fraud are very stiff, $10,000 fine and jail time.
> This voter fraud scare is a fraud within its self.
> The League of Women's Voter estimates millions of legal voters will become disenfranchised. That is un-American.



I won't go back and read your studies. I've read most at one time or another and all one really needs to do is research the source to know what the study will say.
The fact remains is there may, or may not be a significant amount of people voting in place of others, living or dead. We will never really know seeing that dead people rarely bitch that somone has voted in their place.
Next, we have dozens of cases of ACORN, SEIU and others submitting thousands of fraudulent voter registrations. Yes many have been caught and many named culled, but do you really think all of the bad registrations have been removed from the rolls?. I'd bet less than half have been removed. So, these "non people" aren't going to be complaining either. There now becomes literally thousands of opportunities for fraudulent votes with zero chance of anyone being caught.
The only way we would even know someone voted fraudulently is if he was stupid enough to be voting in place of the poll worker's dead mother.

As to your LWV statistics, bullshit! Both Foxfire and I have covered that quite adequately. I suggest you go back a few pages and catch up.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 25, 2012)

Ernie S. said:


> but do you really think all of the bad registrations have been removed from the rolls?


I don't know about that.  

But I do know you're removing more of the good ones than the bad.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

loinboy said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> > but do you really think all of the bad registrations have been removed from the rolls?
> ...



No you don't. Your opinion is not fact


----------



## freedombecki (Aug 25, 2012)

loinboy said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> > but do you really think all of the bad registrations have been removed from the rolls?
> ...


Link, please.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 25, 2012)

And examining 2000 ballots is a valid way to determine voter fraud?   In the two different cases of voter fraud I have personally witnessed, so far as I know, no arrest was ever made.  The ONLY way it was caught was that somebody signing in noticed the signature on the page and identifed one of them as a person who had died weeks before; the other as a person who was out of the country.   For every one of those that is discovered, how many are never ever reported?  NM now has photo I.D. and I suspect such incidents will be much reduced.

And in rebuttal to Kiwiman's 'studies'--noting somebody has probably already posted this:



> "The electoral system cannot inspire public confidence if no safeguards exist to deter or detect fraud or to confirm the identity of voters." That was the conclusion of the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, headed by former president Jimmy Carter and former secretary of State James Baker. The commission recommended stronger photo-identification requirements at the polls. Its logic was straightforward and convincing: Americans must show photo identification for all kinds of day-to-day activities, such as cashing checks or entering government buildings. The many photo ID requirements we encounter in our daily lives are legitimate, effective security measures. Securing the ballot box is just as important.
> 
> The U.S. Supreme Court agrees. In 2008, the court recognized the threat posed by voter fraud and ruled that Indiana's photo ID requirement was a legitimate, non-discriminatory means of protecting the integrity of elections. The Supreme Court upheld Indiana's law despite no concrete evidence of fraud in Indiana's elections.
> 
> ...


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 25, 2012)

freedombecki said:


> Link, please.


Here's one example that shows 35% of the people purged from the registration list, were legally registered to vote.



> _1) An internal analysis conducted by the Tennessee Democratic Party and the Democratic National Committee's voter protection team has found that more than 11,000 voters statewide, who are still active on the voter file, have had parts of their voting history disappear.
> 
> 2) In new investigative research by BLACK BOX VOTING, examining what actually happens to voters wrongfully classified as "inactive", it was found that 35 percent of these were actually purged (cancelled from the voter rolls). _


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 25, 2012)

Ernie S. said:


> No you don't. Your opinion is not fact


It's not my opinion, it's what I have found when I researched this issue.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 25, 2012)

Yeah TN Democratic Party and the DNC. Real trustworthy data there. Did they hire ACORN to run the numbers for them?


----------



## copsnrobbers (Aug 25, 2012)

oldernwiser said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



The only thing Sharpten ever said that wasn't a lie was.. "Of course he's a (Obama) Socialist". Was said to Heraldo Rivera on Fox about a year ago.


----------



## Ernie S. (Aug 26, 2012)

Where does the 260K number come from? Did Al pull it out of his ass like Duke Lacrosse and Tawana Brawley?
Are there really 260 K people in PA that can't cash a check or buy a beer? That have never held a job or collected welfare?


----------



## freedombecki (Aug 26, 2012)

loinboy said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > Link, please.
> ...


You skipped the part about voter participation, "Did not vote in last two federal elections."

That means, if you don't vote for two consecutive important elections, you will have to reactivate your registration sometime between now and the next election.

Maybe it is considered a responsibility in the great state of Tennessee.

And that's how they teach responsibility there to irresponsible voters who play hookey from the polls while getting that free day off.

I'd leave them alone on that one. The lawsuit mentioned? I'd like to see the court outcome.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 26, 2012)

freedombecki said:


> You skipped the part about voter participation, "Did not vote in last two federal elections."
> 
> That means, if you don't vote for two consecutive important elections, you will have to reactivate your registration sometime between now and the next election.
> 
> ...


The problem is, records have shown that they DID VOTE in the last two elections, yet were still re-classified as "inactive".  



> _Records show that this set of 1,638 voters deemed inactive in 2006 *HAD voted in the 2004 general election*; also, they had not moved, died, been convicted of a felony, been duplicates, had incorrect social security numbers, or changed name or any other information. Thus, *these voters did not qualify for transfer to "Inactive" status in 2006*, which led directly to purge processes in 2007 and 2009. _


So they didn't play "hookey", as you tried to make it seem.  They voted.  They participated.  They did their civic duty and what did they get in return?  Your bullshit plan for voter suppression!


----------



## freedombecki (Aug 26, 2012)

loinboy said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > You skipped the part about voter participation, "Did not vote in last two federal elections."
> ...


I wrote no plan for Tennesee's voter issues or any other state for that matter.

I'm a woman of the cloth. Quilt cloth, that is.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 26, 2012)

loinboy said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > Link, please.
> ...



In my state if you don't vote in the primary or general election, you are purged and have to re-register.   That is the way it should be as it gives the election officials a fighting chance to have folks in the correct precinct and allows for better record keeping.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 27, 2012)

Foxfyre said:


> In my state if you don't vote in the primary or general election, you are purged and have to re-register.   That is the way it should be as it gives the election officials a fighting chance to have folks in the correct precinct and allows for better record keeping.


The problem is that 1,635 people did vote and were still purged off the record.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 27, 2012)

Ernie S. said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > Earlier in this thread I posted the results of two studies on voter fraud.  The conclusion is that a person is more likely to hit by lightening that voter fraud being committed.
> ...



*XXXXX* I know both of you probably know quite a bit more about the election process, stats and procedures than the LWV.  I mean, what does this group do that makes them think their 
credible anyways?
And my poor 92 year old mother, who hasn't had a photo ID since she stopped driving and traveling the world 20 years ago, who would of voted for your boy, Romney.  She has been a loyal Republican and a financial contributor for decades. But she refuses to be forced to prove who she is after voting for 46 years since she became a US citizen.
As I am not going to search for your's and Foxfire's (a very fine poster, I might add) expert discussion, so I am not sure you read LWV's statement.  Here it is:
Statement by Elisabeth MacNamara, President, LWVUS at a Forum Entitled "Excluded from Democracy: The Impact of Recent State Voting Changes" | League of Women Voters.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Aug 30, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Here are the facts related to voter fraud:
> 
> People seemingly voting after they've been dead for years. Drug kingpins buying votes from poor people to sway elections. Non-citizens being bussed to the polls and coached on how to vote. Stories of voting fraud are shocking, and states have been taking action to make sure that elections are secure. But the Justice Department, led by Attorney General Eric Holder, has blocked states at almost every turn.
> 
> ...


*XXXXX* We dont elect these people,they are selected for us by the elite.FDR himself said that.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 30, 2012)

Sorry.  I don't consider obscure sources putting out Youtube opinion or Rachel Maddow to be credible sources.  I want something other than strident partisan opinion please if you're going to make the charge.

I can find sources that will show Barack Obama is demon possessed if you're going to accept manufactured evidence as credible.

I know there is voter fraud committed all the time which is why I am in favor of tightening the procedures, including voter I.D., to deal with it.

Your charge was that the Romney camp committed voter fraud.  I want to see real evidence, not manufactured youtube clips.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 5, 2012)

No, she would only be an apologist if she was making excuses for voter fraud committed by Romney.

What we have is a claim that is made, and then not backed up (that there is voter fraud associated with Romney) and so you are calling those of us who don't take you at your word "Romney apologists".

Nope. We'd be apologists if you had provided any verification of the claim. You didn't, so it's just a garden variety fail on your side.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 7, 2012)

And the overwhelming evidence of voter fraud continues to mount....

*What happens when 1,099 felons vote in an election that's decided by just 312 votes? Proof that voter fraud is real&#8212;and a real problem.*

York: When 1,099 felons vote in race won by 312 ballots | WashingtonExaminer.com


----------



## FreeWilly (Sep 7, 2012)

I think its pretty obvious that republicans put this bill in to place to deter non id holding Americans from voting.  As a new voter Im surprised that you could vote before without an id.  Terrorists are everywhere thats why I have to have 3 documents just to drive a scooter around town legally.  But we want less government regulation right?  I am all for less government.  This is not the "republican" party I thought I signed up for.


----------



## FreeWilly (Sep 7, 2012)

I really wish we could just tell them to cancel the electric bill and go home.  Its such a joke.  They dont earn what we pay em.  They are costing us more money than they are worth.


----------



## copsnrobbers (Sep 7, 2012)

If liberal people can cheat they will.. If The Liberals can lie like they did at the DNC the liberal people will cheat even more. Hey, Those people are towed by the nose... Remember who runs those Unions..
Remember who promises those checks.. Remember who votes for liberals.
Then the New Black Panthers enter the equation..

Let them cheat... it won't matter. Romney's going to win and they who count know it.


----------



## depotoo (Sep 9, 2012)

if people seriously think voter fraud is not legit, then here are some items for you, unfortunately I am still not able to post url's yet - just google if you need to-

A grand jury later determined that Adlai Stevenson had unwittingly benefited from some 100,000 illegal ballots that had been cast in Chicago in the 1982 gubernatorial election.

did you know it was found in one county in CA for a US Congressional seat, over 700 illegal votes were cast? Don't tell me this isn't a problem that doesn't need to be dealt with.
[Footnote] In total, the Task Force found clear and convincing evidence that 748 invalid votes were cast in this election.
This actually went to the US Congress to be investigated and the footnote is the result of what Congress's investigation found.  This was in just one county (Orange) in California - 748 illegal votes.

I have many more for you but can't post the links.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Sep 9, 2012)

Foxfyre said:


> Sorry.  I don't consider obscure sources putting out Youtube opinion or Rachel Maddow to be credible sources.  I want something other than strident partisan opinion please if you're going to make the charge.
> 
> I can find sources that will show Barack Obama is demon possessed if you're going to accept manufactured evidence as credible.
> 
> ...



The issue isnt that fraud occurs, *but that it so rarely occurs*, in one case less than 0.0004 percent of the time, that laws restricting the fundamental right of voting, such as excessive ID requirements, arent justified. 



> The "voter fraud" cry has been increasingly used to justify policies that suppress legitimate voters. *But the cry is baseless; allegations of voter fraudespecially polling place impersonation fraudalmost always prove to be inflated or inaccurate. *The Brennan Center carefully examines allegations of fraud to get at the truth behind the claims. *The truth of the matter is that voter fraudvotes knowingly cast by ineligible individualsis exceedingly rare; one is more likely to be struck by lightning than to commit voter fraud. *
> 
> Allegations of Voter Fraud | Brennan Center for Justice


----------



## depotoo (Sep 9, 2012)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry.  I don't consider obscure sources putting out Youtube opinion or Rachel Maddow to be credible sources.  I want something other than strident partisan opinion please if you're going to make the charge.
> ...



the Brennan Center for Justice is hardly a non-partisan organization-
The organization is currently headed by Michael Waldman, former Director of Speechwriting for President Bill Clinton from 19951999
also check out their co-chair Patricia Bauman, far from unbiased.
And it was founded in honor of Justice Brennan who believed in the principle of a living Constitution.


----------



## Intense (Sep 9, 2012)

Foxfyre said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



Not always. I'm Independent. No reason for me to vote in the Primaries in NY.


----------



## Intense (Sep 9, 2012)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry.  I don't consider obscure sources putting out Youtube opinion or Rachel Maddow to be credible sources.  I want something other than strident partisan opinion please if you're going to make the charge.
> ...



Overlooking cover up and failure to report, you may have a point. Like in my Precinct, when something happens, and the Police discourage you from making a complaint or filing a Crime Report, it makes the statistics look so much better.


----------



## Navy1960 (Sep 12, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> And the overwhelming evidence of voter fraud continues to mount....
> 
> *What happens when 1,099 felons vote in an election that's decided by just 312 votes? Proof that voter fraud is realand a real problem.*
> 
> York: When 1,099 felons vote in race won by 312 ballots | WashingtonExaminer.com



Minnesota statute says that a convicted felon loses his or her civil rights, including the
 right to vote. It also stipulates that a felon's civil rights are automatically reinstated
 when he or she completes their sentence. Completing a sentence means that they have
 completed all parole, probation, and any other terms of their sentence. This is also
 known as being "off-paper". Once a person completes their sentence they have the
 right to vote. See Minnesota statute 609.165 for more details.

So of those  1,099  felons that the article refers too, how many of those fall under this  would be my question.  It would make sense that during  during the recount process when both  Coleman and Franken were represented by attorneys  that had these individuals been unqualified to vote they would have been thrown out.   While I am a a little suspect  in the way that race was run by the state of Minn. more than I am on the voters themselves, the issue of convicted felons does not appear to be at issue.


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 14, 2012)

Posting this video without any inference that it is not staaged or orchestrated as I don't know whether it is the real deal or not:

Registering Tim Tebow and Tom Brady to Vote in Minnesota - YouTube

But. . . . 

If there is no ID or other proof of identity to register, what is to keep any made up name from being registered?   And then, if there is no ID or other proof of identity to vote, what is to keep any person for voting as that made up name?

Can you say with certainty that it does not happen?   That without voter ID there is no way to know whether it has happened?  Is happening?  That nobody is dishonest enough to utilize such a practice?


----------



## Pinocchio (Sep 15, 2012)

Why aren't they being challenged?  They don't require picture id either

Is it because absentee ballots favor the Reps?

I think the motivation is obvious.


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 15, 2012)

Pinocchio said:


> Why aren't they being challenged?  They don't require picture id either
> 
> Is it because absentee ballots favor the Reps?
> 
> I think the motivation is obvious.



An absentee ballot should be mailed only to a registered voter.  Which is why I favor requiring photo ID plus some form of proof of residence (a utility bill etc) to register to vote in the first place.   I personally think every person should be issued a voter registration card with a unique number on it and that number should have to be written on the absentee ballot and that nunber should be verified by election officials before the ballot is counted.  That would eliminate most voter fraud regarding absentee ballot.

And if the voter registration card was also a photo ID, that would also solve all problems of disenfranchising anybody.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 18, 2012)

Pinocchio said:


> Why aren't they being challenged?  They don't require picture id either
> 
> Is it because absentee ballots favor the Reps?
> 
> I think the motivation is obvious.



Where did you come up with _that_?

First of all, if that were true, then why are the liberals up in arms about this issue? Why don't they just have everyone grab an absentee ballot?

Second, I have been asked to produce picture ID 100% of the time I have requested an absentee ballot.


----------



## Wroberson (Sep 20, 2012)

Most of the voter fraud that takes place, takes place AFTER the polls have closed.  There are organizations that monitor and have videotaped instances where, punching votes out of punch card ballots with sharp styluses at the Dade County Board of Elections on ELECTION NIGHT after the polls were closed.  This was a clear violation of the law. 

That type of fraud came to an end that night and a new technology was introduced to voters in 2004. While computer voting has been around since the 1970's, it was rare and only used in a few polling places.  In 2004, the entire nation to touch screen voting machines without a paper trail. Systems totally lacking in citizen administered checks and balances.

In 2008, they added a paper trailing system and you can see it in action when you touch screen vote.  A little "cash register" type receipt is printed and stored in the touch screen terminal under glass and clearly visible to the voting public.  However, the new computerized machines come complete with two way modems, RFID Chips, and therefore are able to be accessed via wireless technology and therefore can be easily download and upload from a central location.  

The technology is very similar to my new water meter.  It too has an RFID chip and is read from a moving car as it was explained to my by the Village Government employee installing the required meter.  It speeds up the time it takes to get the meter read.  Instead of a walker going house to house with a handheld unit, it's read by a meter reader doing a drive by.

Is it valid to have voters present an ID to vote?  In my opinion yes.   Has every vote been counted?  No.  It used to be if you had an incomplete ballot, like you voted for President, but didn't vote for a judge, or skipped the uncontested race for dog catcher, your ballot was red-flagged and not counted for being incomplete.  It hurt when I found out, I don't vote for judges or tick in for uncontested seats.  This has been changed to some degree.  You are now informed that your ballot is incomplete and are given a 2nd chance to vote, or if you want to keep the ballot as is, you may cast it.

There will never be a completely fair election.  Popular votes don't count, it's all about the electorate, and though they take an oath to vote as the people intended, it doesn't always turn out that way.  Many states have winner take all, so when Joe get 33% of the vote to Mikes, 67%, Mike gets 100% of the electoral votes.  Some states also share the votes and divides the electorate on a scale.

Don't feel disenfranchised.  Very few of the people you vote for actually know you and can't help you, or are unwilling to even give you a thumbs up for the support.  The best option is one of faith that the people we vote for have the very best intentions to keep America strong and not give in to pressure from the Elites running the show in front of and behind the scenes, or performing drive by vote countings..


----------



## editec (Sep 20, 2012)

Here are the facts on voter fraud.

IN all of FLA during the last two elections cycles they found ONE EXAMPLE of voter fraud.

Some right wing OZZIE voted in the last two elections.


----------



## Zoom-boing (Sep 20, 2012)

Pinocchio said:


> Why aren't they being challenged?  They don't require picture id either
> 
> Is it because absentee ballots favor the Reps?
> 
> I think the motivation is obvious.



If you vote absentee ballot in a state that requires a photo ID, you must provide that photo ID proof within 6 days after the election.


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 20, 2012)

editec said:


> Here are the facts on voter fraud.
> 
> IN all of FLA during the last two elections cycles they found ONE EXAMPLE of voter fraud.
> 
> Some right wing OZZIE voted in the last two elections.



You have a source more credible than the George Soros funded Think Progress for that?

And what is the lawsuit recently filed in Florida asserting that 180,000 or so registrations in that state are illegal?   If so, how would you know how much voter fraud was committed?

And  I seem to recall that many Democrats to this day insist that there was widespread voter fraud in Flordia that allowed George W. Bush to be elected President of the United States.

So which is it?   Voter integrity is either a problem or it isn't.


----------



## depotoo (Sep 21, 2012)

editec said:


> Here are the facts on voter fraud.
> 
> IN all of FLA during the last two elections cycles they found ONE EXAMPLE of voter fraud.
> 
> Some right wing OZZIE voted in the last two elections.



Wendy Rosen, Maryland Democrat, Quits Race Over Voter Fraud Allegations | TPMMuckraker
NBC2 Investigates: Voter fraud - NBC-2.com WBBH News for Fort Myers, Cape Coral & Naples, Florida
NBC2 Investigates: Voter Fraud - Part 2 - NBC-2.com WBBH News for Fort Myers, Cape Coral & Naples, Florida
Illegal voting investigation grows dramatically - NBC-2.com WBBH News for Fort Myers, Cape Coral & Naples, Florida
Man pleads guilty to voter fraud in Fla. | TBO.com
Florida vote fraud - Ballotpedia
FL: Absentee ballot fraud investigation heats up in South Florida « Watchdog News
Madison County Officials Arrested for Voter Fraud
want more?


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 21, 2012)

depotoo said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > Here are the facts on voter fraud.
> ...



Good research.  You're much better with Google than I am.


----------



## depotoo (Sep 22, 2012)

Foxfyre said:


> depotoo said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...



Thank you.  I actually use bing as I hate google.


----------



## Intense (Sep 22, 2012)

Navy1960 said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > And the overwhelming evidence of voter fraud continues to mount....
> ...



Personally, I think Politics, too many times trumps the Rule of Law, and Due Process. Sad, but real. Making assumptions without the documentation to back it up is dangerous, either way.


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 22, 2012)

depotoo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > depotoo said:
> ...



Well you certainly successfully challenged the contention that there has only been one case of voter fraud identified in Florida.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 1, 2012)

And the voter fraud and cheating by the Democrats continues. It's a shame they feel entitled to take America illegally. America needs to implement strict voter laws that prevent fraud and inflict harsh penalties on anyone involved with that illegal activity. It's really step #2 in restoring America.

Last week, TheBlaze brought you a story from a North Carolina voting precinct using electronic voting machines that was already experiencing issues where votes for GOP candidate Mitt Romney were being changed to Democratic candidate Barack Obama. Now, its allegedly happening again, this time in both Kansas and Ohio

Early Voting Sees Calibration Issues With Some Touchscreen Voting Machines | TheBlaze.com


----------



## Borillar (Nov 8, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> And the voter fraud and cheating by the Democrats continues. It's a shame they feel entitled to take America illegally. America needs to implement strict voter laws that prevent fraud and inflict harsh penalties on anyone involved with that illegal activity. It's really step #2 in restoring America.
> 
> Last week, TheBlaze brought you a story from a North Carolina voting precinct using electronic voting machines that was already experiencing issues where votes for GOP candidate Mitt Romney were being changed to Democratic candidate Barack Obama. Now, its allegedly happening again, this time in both Kansas and Ohio
> 
> Early Voting Sees Calibration Issues With Some Touchscreen Voting Machines | TheBlaze.com



How about this one?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSvDcwxK7M8]2012 Voting Machines Altering Votes from Obama to Romney - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Foxfyre (Nov 8, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Pinocchio said:
> 
> 
> > Why aren't they being challenged?  They don't require picture id either
> ...



I wish that was required everywhere.  Here all you have to do is write and ask for one and they send it no questions asked.  So a dedicated cheat could conceivably register a number of names, all with different addresses, and receive multiple absentee ballots.  However, I've heard rumors that the absentee ballots aren't counted unless the 'wrong person' will otherwise win.  Reassuring huh.


----------



## oldernwiser (Nov 9, 2012)

BDBoop said:


> I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> 
> There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.



On top of that, the ONE case reported this year of a Republican woman voting twice in Nevada was caught before she even got home.

ONE case, and it was caught. Without an ID.
This is just a solution that needs a problem.

On the other hand, let's look at the number of complaints of voter fraud that occurred this year in election offices in a number of states. One officer was caught filling in the open spaces on ballots. This is something an ID law isn't going to fix.

Ever.


----------



## Foxfyre (Nov 9, 2012)

oldernwiser said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> ...



That is true and we vote with paper ballots that are then scanned through an electronic svcanner that tabulates the votes.  But you color in the the circle by your choice and it has occurred to me that on absentee ballots, how easy it would be for a corrupt official to nullify those or color in a circle when somebody didn't vote.

I wish we would go back to the old system where everybody voted on the same day and pretty much everybody went to their assigned precinct polling place to vote.  Only the very few who were out of the state on election day requested and received absentee ballots.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 10, 2012)

Borillar said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > And the voter fraud and cheating by the Democrats continues. It's a shame they feel entitled to take America illegally. America needs to implement strict voter laws that prevent fraud and inflict harsh penalties on anyone involved with that illegal activity. It's really step #2 in restoring America.
> ...



Which begs the question then - why the left doesn't want to require proper ID when voting? It's pretty clear that fraud on the left is rampant, and exceeds an "anomalies" from the right, that it's still beneficial to the left to insist on fraudulent elections.

The only way this will ever get solved is if the right were to exceed the left in rampant voter fraud. Sadly, the right has far too much integrity for that.


----------



## LibertyLemming (Nov 10, 2012)

IDs would have to be provided free of charge or this is nothing more than a poll tax which is unconstitutional. I'm sure someone already said this.


----------



## oldernwiser (Nov 10, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Borillar said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...



I live in NC. Unless I was mistaken, when I asked about it the ward worker said that voting machines aren't used in this state. In another issue, the same phenomenon was YouTubed - only there, the issue was one where the voter couldn't vote for Obama. And still - there's no indication that having a photo ID would have prevented these things.

I'm truly loving the crying that's going on here. It seems like only yesterday that it was the Democrats who were screaming about the cheating at the polls when Gore lost. Is this what we do when our boy doesn't place?


----------



## Borillar (Nov 10, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Borillar said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...



Maybe Tagg Romney should have bought more voting machines to put his dad over.


----------



## zonly1 (Nov 10, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> Borillar said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...


Your youtube link is conveniently deleted.

Thanks for bringing it up.


----------



## oldernwiser (Nov 10, 2012)

zonly1 said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > Borillar said:
> ...


Try this one. Right off CentralPAVote:

Glitchy PA Voting Booth Footage Hits YouTube - Montgomeryville-Lansdale, PA Patch


----------



## Raincat (Nov 10, 2012)

Voting machines where I was were giving the people there fits...
Some dudes handing out paper ballots were wearing obama hats,and giving out more than one ballot.


----------



## oldernwiser (Nov 10, 2012)

Raincat said:


> Voting machines where I was were giving the people there fits...
> Some dudes handing out paper ballots were wearing obama hats,and giving out more than one ballot.



Now THAT'S an issue if the folks with the Obama hats were inside where you do your voting. It's illegal to campaign at the polls themselves.

In my precinct, there were 2 tables camped at the door. They were both handing out "sample" ballots - complete with their suggested choices filled in for easy reference. I took one of each and then voted the way *I* intended to.


----------



## Foxfyre (Nov 10, 2012)

oldernwiser said:


> Raincat said:
> 
> 
> > Voting machines where I was were giving the people there fits...
> ...



You're kidding.  The sample ballots were already filled in?  That might not be illegal, but I would sure question the ethics of it.

As for discussing voter fraud,  this has been going on for years because it has been rampant for years, most especially when the poor and ignorant are especially targeted to become voters but are instructed on what sort of voters they must be.  I don't see much whining on the part of the right suggesting that this recent election was 'stolen' except that some of us know that there is attempt to do that here and there, most especially at the local level where things are easier to manipulate.

A free people must be able to be confident in a fair, accurate, and honest vote and must promote ways to ensure that and must speak out against those who would corrupt the system.  Otherwise the people have no power of any kind.    Any dictator will tell you that those who vote don't have the power.  He who counts the votes has the power.


----------



## gwennie (Nov 11, 2012)

The dead regularly vote in Chicago, so I would imagine that they also vote in New York, Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, and several other swing states.  Not only that, but the dead notoriously vote in the large cities rather than in smaller rural towns.  And this last election there were some stupid people who were actually going around bragging that they already voted 4 times that day and were planning to go do their fifth vote somewhere else.  So, yes, voter fraud is commonplace.  A simple ID could put integrity and fairness into our election process rather than simply taking someone at their word that they are who they say they are which effectively allows them to cast a ballot 3, 4, or 5 times at different places.  A state ID is required for just about everything......welfare benefits, unemployment compensation benefits, SS benefits, veteran status, student status, driving, etc....there is absolutely no reason why people who are legal citizens wouldn't be able to get one, especially seeing as how states will give them one free of charge.  There is no disenfranchisement taking place among minorities, except for the active duty service members.......this election year they were either sent ballots with the wrong dates on them or were not given them at all.  THAT is disenfranchizement, yet I don't hear anyone from the left hollering about it.  People who do not live here legally do not have the right to vote in this country, yet many of them are having a huge impact on the elections.  Time to put an end to it.


----------



## gwennie (Nov 11, 2012)

editec said:


> Here are the facts on voter fraud.
> 
> IN all of FLA during the last two elections cycles they found ONE EXAMPLE of voter fraud.
> 
> Some right wing OZZIE voted in the last two elections.




Nonsense......go live in Chicago and see what happens on voting day.  You won't need statistics, which are often rigged to "prove" whatever point one is trying to make, to see how much voter fraud does take place.  obama came from Chicago....he is very well schooled in many things, including voter fraud.  He was directly tied to ACORN and many of them admitted to committing voter fraud in his favor and several went to jail as a result.  So, please, stop trying to convince people that voter fraud is "exceedingly rare" and not worth making voter ID an issue.


----------



## oldernwiser (Nov 11, 2012)

gwennie said:


> The dead regularly vote in Chicago, so I would imagine that they also vote in New York, Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, and several other swing states.  Not only that, but the dead notoriously vote in the large cities rather than in smaller rural towns.  And this last election there were some stupid people who were actually going around bragging that they already voted 4 times that day and were planning to go do their fifth vote somewhere else.  So, yes, voter fraud is commonplace.  A simple ID could put integrity and fairness into our election process rather than simply taking someone at their word that they are who they say they are which effectively allows them to cast a ballot 3, 4, or 5 times at different places.  A state ID is required for just about everything......welfare benefits, unemployment compensation benefits, SS benefits, veteran status, student status, driving, etc....there is absolutely no reason why people who are legal citizens wouldn't be able to get one, especially seeing as how states will give them one free of charge.  There is no disenfranchisement taking place among minorities, except for the active duty service members.......this election year they were either sent ballots with the wrong dates on them or were not given them at all.  THAT is disenfranchizement, yet I don't hear anyone from the left hollering about it.  People who do not live here legally do not have the right to vote in this country, yet many of them are having a huge impact on the elections.  Time to put an end to it.



This may be true - and I am, in no way suggesting that it is. But it seems to me that restructuring our government services, which fail to share information among other departments, would be a MUCH better and fairer way to resolve the issue of zombie voters.


----------



## theconservative (Nov 11, 2012)

where is the proof that such fraud exists


----------



## oldernwiser (Nov 11, 2012)

theconservative said:


> where is the proof that such fraud exists



And then, there's that as well.
I've heard far more about the dirty dealings of registrars and county officials than I have of zombie voters. Recently, a Nevada woman was caught voting twice before she even got home from the polls - without having to present an ID at all.


----------



## Grandma (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxfyre said:


> You're kidding.  The sample ballots were already filled in?  That might not be illegal, but I would sure question the ethics of it.



Sample ballots are printed with fake names, like 

Comb and Brush Party - Sherry White

End Table Party - Gary Violet

Octagon Party - Harry Grey

Apple Party - Larry Green


----------



## oldernwiser (Nov 12, 2012)

Grandma said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > You're kidding.  The sample ballots were already filled in?  That might not be illegal, but I would sure question the ethics of it.
> ...



That might be true where you live, but the samples I got had the REAL candidates and parties listed AND filled in on both the Democrat and the Republican samples.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 12, 2012)

And democrats still want to pretend that there is no voter fraud going on?!? A word to the wise here: if you're going to cheat, you may not want to do it so blatantly that it becomes glaringly obvious to everyone...

*ROMNEY GOT ZERO VOTES IN 59 PRECINCTS IN PHILLY, AND 9 PRECINCTS IN OHIO*

Romney Won Zero Votes In 9 Cleveland Precints, 59 Philadelphia Precincts | TheBlaze.com


----------



## Charles_Main (Nov 12, 2012)

BDBoop said:


> I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> 
> There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.



There is no Evidence Requiring a Photo ID, that can be provided at low or no cost to those who need it, Would disenfranchise huge numbers of Legitimate Voters.

Other than your sides spin.

In fact the only people that Logically would be Disenfranchised by such a Requirement would be those who cant afford one, (which we can fix by making it free) or those who can't legally get one in this country (people who are not Legitimate voters.

You guys might win the PR battle with your Spin on this issue, but it does not change the facts.

But then why would I expect reason from people who's party requires Photo ID to get into their Convention, But claims wanting to require ID to Vote is a racist attempt to suppress Minority Votes. 

No reasoning with you people on this issue, it's all emotion and talking points. The only reason your party even opposes this sensible requirement is because they know they can spin in into the Narrative they have and use it to lock up the Minority vote. Honesty or the Integrity of our Democracy are less important to them than winning.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Nov 13, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> People seemingly voting after they've been dead for years. Drug kingpins buying votes from poor people to sway elections. Non-citizens being bussed to the polls and coached on how to vote.



None of those are sentences.


----------



## oldernwiser (Nov 13, 2012)

Charles_Main said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> ...



And besides the Beck rhetoric, where is the proof that the amount of voter fraud committed on the ballot end is sophisticated enough that 200+ years of elections hasn't found a fairly decent method to detect without requiring a photo ID? I don't think even a drug kingpin has the financial wherewithal to even come close to swaying an election - especially a national election. 

I do think that elections are beginning to be stolen however. But the theft comes in the form of media disinformation, the corruption of district elections workers, and direct voter intimidation by groups like True The Vote and others. These have a far greater impact and aren't stoppable by requiring voter ID. 

If you truly want an honest election, then work to end those atrocities - they're far more common than zombie and multi-voters.


----------



## Borillar (Nov 13, 2012)

Charles_Main said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> ...



I personally don't think that requiring ID to vote is a big deal. I have to carry an ID in order to drive, cash checks, etc. I think most people have them. Now would be a good time to enact such a law. I think the problem many were having with this kind of requirement is that it was brought up so close to an election, that it would be difficult for everyone to comply in time. 

I live in Oregon, and we have gone to vote by mail. Before that, we had voter cards which we had to present at the precinct before being given a ballot. Requiring proper ID in order to vote is a reasonable requirement, IMHO.


----------



## oldfart (Nov 13, 2012)

I'm originally from Illinois and I'm familiar with the traditional means of election fraud both in Chicago and downstate.  Voter ID would stop virtually none of it.  What is needed is independent monitoring in every polling place.  Here is how it works:

1.  A person does not need to be dead for someone else to vote in their place.  An unsigned line on the registration book is enough.  Just sign and cast a ballot.  This requires a certain amount of collusion among poll workers, but that isn't a problem in many precincts.  If detected, it is still generally not possible to identify the additional bogus ballots.  

2.  Someone does not vote the entire ballot.  An election official simply votes the downticket races.  This again requires a small amount of collusion, but is otherwise undetectible.  

3.  As Mr. Dooley (Peter Finley Dunne) famously said "A vote on the tally sheet is worth two in the ballot box".


----------



## Foxfyre (Nov 13, 2012)

Charles_Main said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> ...



And the fact is that 99.9% of those who 'wouldn't be able to afford a voter ID' already have one because they have to have it to get their other government benefits.  I and a whole bunch of others would almost certainly be happy to chip in a few bucks to pay for a voter ID for the very few folks who would want one and can't afford it.

Having dealt with transient relief for a substantial part of my life, it is my experience that most do not want to show any kind of ID for anything because that makes it too easy to spot those who are milking the system for all they can get.  Again and again and again they showed up at my desk asking for money to get to their destination where there was a job waiting for them.  Every single one had been mugged or robbed and that is why they had no personal ID of any kind.  And they couldn't provide a name or phone number of anybody in a place they had come from so we could verify their ID nor could they provide the name and number of the person who was holding that job for them.   And more than a few became quite angry when we offered them actual food and gasoline and a place to overnight rather than money.

It's pretty hard not to become jaded after you've dealt with a few hundred of such cases.   And that includes suspicion of those who claim disenfranchisement if they are required to have positive ID to vote.


----------



## gwennie (Nov 13, 2012)

theconservative said:


> where is the proof that such fraud exists



Look up ACORN and you will uncover quite a bit of voter fraud, both from the people who were "registering" potential voters as well as by those who voted multiple times.


----------



## gwennie (Nov 13, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> And democrats still want to pretend that there is no voter fraud going on?!? A word to the wise here: if you're going to cheat, you may not want to do it so blatantly that it becomes glaringly obvious to everyone...
> 
> *ROMNEY GOT ZERO VOTES IN 59 PRECINCTS IN PHILLY, AND 9 PRECINCTS IN OHIO*
> 
> Romney Won Zero Votes In 9 Cleveland Precints, 59 Philadelphia Precincts | TheBlaze.com



Much of the Left do not want to be bothered with those silly details....they're inconvenient, messy, and completely contradict their story of "rare" voter fraud.  It's not something they care about, unless of course, they perceive someone of color or a particular sex is prevented from voting.  Then it becomes the whole "disenfranchisement" nonsense.  I do find it rather bizarre that Romney didn't get ANY votes in those areas, but what I find just as bizarre are those polling stations in OH, FL, PA where some of their precincts had 115% or 130% or 108% (pick a number) voters come to vote.......can't you have only 100% of voter turnout in a precinct????


----------



## gwennie (Nov 13, 2012)

oldernwiser said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Disagree.....those atrocities are just as common as the zombie and multi-voter fraud.  If someone has a problem with True The Vote being in/near polling stations, then certainly the same would apply to those associated with the New Black Panther Party being present at polling stations complete with baseball bats, no less.  Not to mention polling stations having obama's picture put up on the wall, election workers wearing obama hats, election workers who were going through the lines that voters were waiting in and tried to convince them to vote obama, intimidation tactics made by union officials, etc.....so, let's not focus solely on conservatives.  The left is far more adept at using these tactics....and they are allowed to get away with it, especially since obama runs the DOJ.  One glaring example.....Holder and obama refused to prosecute an obvious case of voter intimidation by the Black Panther Party in 2008 and they have shown no signs of changing that intention.  As for finging an uninterested third party to monitor the elections at the polls, good luck with that one.  While I agree that neither party should be able to intimidate, harass, "encourage", or guilt someone into voting for the party official's perferred candidate, it is probably nearly impossible to find election workers who are not influenced by the WH administration......who clearly have a vested interest in making the election come out in their favor.


----------



## oldernwiser (Nov 13, 2012)

gwennie said:


> oldernwiser said:
> 
> 
> > Charles_Main said:
> ...



And that sort of proves my point rather than refutes it, doesn't it? I didn't mention left or right - simply that voter intimidation and campaigning inside the polls is far more common and FAR more effective than precinct frauds. It's wrong no matter who's involved - and IDs are not going to prevent the dishonesty at that level. The only thing an ID will accomplish is to keep honest people honest - and that, to me, is a total waste of time and government expense.


----------



## cyberella (Nov 16, 2012)

This website has a massive list of voter fraud cases uncovered:
(Most prominent 'vote fraud site' on the net) 
Barack Obama Voter Fraud 2012
(check site to get their FaceBook url. Most of action going there. Cannot link)

Sign their petition here:
Petition for Recount on the 2012 Presidential Election | Petition2Congress

The election has not been certified. Here's what you can do:
http://thecompetentconservative.com/elections-have-not-yet-been-certified-heres-what-you-can-do/






'ATLAS SHRUGS' voter fraud list. 'Atlas Shrugs' has a list but cannot link. Contains video of eyewitness pollwatcher who verifies busload of Somalians bussed in, 95% spoke no english. Told to vote Obama. Google 'Atlas Shrugs voter fraud list'


----------



## cyberella (Nov 17, 2012)

Read 'The Obama File'.

The Obama File

The sleaze in this 'man's' background is surreal.

The United States Library of Congres has selected TheObamaFile.comfor inclusion in itshistoric collection
of Internet materials  The Obama File -- Library of Congress


----------



## Sallow (Nov 17, 2012)

The only voter fraud is on the part of conservatives.

Who screwed the pooch so badly with this country they can't even get that right.


----------



## Foxfyre (Nov 17, 2012)

You guys can dodge and weave and obfusicate and divert and accuse and blame and throw in all the red herrings in the sea and build enough straw men to to fill a major city, and it won't change the one single concept that should be the focus of all freedom loving Americans re voter fraud.

If the people cannot be confident in the integrity and honesty of their vote, they have no freedom, no power, no self determination of any kind.  And the ONLY reason to discourage doing everything necessary to ensure an honest vote is to promote a dishonest one.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 29, 2014)

The next time a Democrat wins a clean election will be the _first_ time a Democrat has ever won a clean election. The lack of integrity and the depth of depravity of a liberal is alarming. They've lost on the battlefield of ideas. They've lost in the court of public opinion. And they've lost in the voting booths. So now they just usurp the U.S. Constitution, engage in significant and egregious voter fraud, utilize the IRS to block legitimate political organizations, and even resort to petty theft like a delinquent teenager. What does it say about a liberals faith in their own failed ideology that they feel the need to constantly resort to cheating?

Police Issue Arrest Warrant for Husband of Dem State Senator After GOP Volunteers Catch Him Red-Handed on Video Video TheBlaze.com


----------



## Vigilante (Oct 29, 2014)




----------



## Vigilante (Oct 29, 2014)

Sallow said:


> The only voter fraud is on the part of conservatives.
> 
> Who screwed the pooch so badly with this country they can't even get that right.



How soon the terminally stupid forget....


----------



## Shrimpbox (Nov 3, 2014)

Let's take examples of documented voter fraud and extrapolate.

Vote harvesters are going into Latino districts, getting those with voter id to sign ballots which the harvester then fills out and turns in, the Obama machine has thousands of salaried workers doing this, almost impossible to trace.

Prospective voters are paid in cash, in whiskey, in food stamps to go and cast their votes for certain candidates.

Souls to the polls is a religious sponsored and socially pressured strong arm  effort to bring the block vote to the polls. This kind of activity is repeated as vote harvesters herd people to the polls. Once again there is no criminal penalty for coercing people to the polls (uninterested voters) but the laws are being skirted.

Three people voting fraudulently per million, laughable. Consider only the dead people that vote.

One lady has just been jailed for voting nineteen times. Another in ohio that voted six times received a heroes welcome from democrats after her six year sentence was suspended, and she was a democratic poll worker.

Thousands of people have voted in two different states.

This is another example of liberals saying something which therefore makes it the truth. The only reason I don't predict election outcome is because I believe the opportunity for fraud especially in states like Colorado where democrats have set the election process to allow for massive voter fraud is unpredictable.

Voter I'd cards in most states are free. No one without id in public life can do anything. As some posts have already pointed out voter I'd laws in Georgia and Connecticut have nit only made for cleaner elections but have increased voter turnout.

No voter fraud, please! Stop pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 3, 2014)

“Let's take examples of documented voter fraud and extrapolate.”

Irrelevant.

Cite documented evidence where fraud by identity changed the outcome of a given election. Absent such evidence, voter ID laws are unwarranted.

The state may not place an undue burden on the fundamental right to vote predicated solely on subjective conjecture, speculation, and extrapolation. That the state perceives a citizen 'might' commit voter fraud by identity is not justification to indeed restrict one's civil rights.


----------



## Vigilante (Nov 3, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “Let's take examples of documented voter fraud and extrapolate.”
> 
> Irrelevant.
> 
> ...



Do you have the SCOTUS ruling on that?


----------



## Warner Athey (Nov 3, 2014)

BDBoop said:


> I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> 
> There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.


How much voter fraud do you want?  If the election is close it would not take much to change the results.  What do you mean by
disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.   It is that some kind of code for keeping up the fraud?  
Why is it that Democrats don't want to show an ID to vote?   Is it because they don't have one?  No.  They  have it.
So why would they not want to show it?   Well the ID may not match the name under which they are voting.
That is the real reason to fight voter ID.


----------



## Vigilante (Nov 3, 2014)

Warner Athey said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'
> ...


Warner, BirdPoop was BANNED quite a few months ago... perhaps her SOCK would like to answer you?


----------



## Shrimpbox (Nov 3, 2014)

Irrelevant ? Well you big constitutionalist the Supreme Court doesn't think so. You do believe in the Supreme Court right?

Al Frankenstein was elected by less than 300 votes, so if just one vote in each precinct was fraudulent that tipped the election. A number of years ago it was shown that just changing one vote in every precinct in the country would have changed the national election results. Chicago elections are notoriously corrupt and it has been alleged that mayor daily delivered the presidency to JFK with the jiggering of the ballot box. Once again liberals who have made the definition of voter fraud so narrow that most egregious behavior cannot be prosecuted or discovered. So I guess millions of little cuts are fine and that unless we have a beheading there is no problem. And the best bit of knowledge is that if there is massive voter fraud, say by computer, no one will ever know, and if they do by some miracle discover it, the election will be long over, mission accomplished.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 4, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> That the state perceives a citizen 'might' commit voter fraud by identity is not justification to indeed restrict one's civil rights.


That a liberal perceives a citizen 'might' commit a gun crime is not justification to indeed restrict one's 2nd Amendment *rights*.

I wonder why it is that you don't apply that same standard to other rights? Maybe because applying it to one right (voting) results in more power for your side, while not applying it to another right (guns) leads to more power for your side.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 4, 2014)

P.S. Clayton - there is no "perceived" voter fraud. Only verified, _rampant_ voter fraud...

1.8 Million Voters Are Dead And Other Facts You Didn t Know About Voter Fraud


----------



## konradv (Nov 15, 2014)

Before the election, massive voter fraud by Democrats was predicted in MD, but the Republican won the governorship easily.  IMO, the only fraud was the Republicans' crying "wolf".


----------



## SmarterThanTheAverageBear (Nov 15, 2014)

Rottweiler said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > That the state perceives a citizen 'might' commit voter fraud by identity is not justification to indeed restrict one's civil rights.
> ...



So you want to treat voting rights the same as we treat gun rights? Careful there, you might get something you don't want.


----------

