24 States Refuse To Turn Over Voting Data Unstable President

[Seawytch]

Voter Data: What's Public, What's Private.

 

[dblack]

Yes

No,
No but they have asked for birth dates, felony conviction information, and social security info. That information is considered confidential.

You are making that up. the governor of PA said that the Trump Administration can get the information just like anyone else, just pay 20 dollars.

Much to do over nothing.

Yes, and he will get it just like anyone else, over 600 million records of raw data with no social numbers or birth dates to match on. No state releases birth dates and social security numbers to the public.

I am not positive what people are so damn scared of. Do they think Pence is going to look at the list, determine who is a democrat and then send the IRS after them? I can understand the concern since that is pretty much what Obama did do.

But what in the hell difference does it make if someone knows your party affiliation? Like that is hard to determine? What I am thinking is you all are scared of what might turn up. Maybe every election in every state is rampant with fraud, that is why their is resistance. Maybe still the commission will find no fraud, that should make everyone happy. But if they do it sure would be nice to have the information to back it up.

Me thinks that the establishment is the one opposing this using the guise of privacy, which is BS.

This isn't about individual voters. It's strong arm politics. Trump is "building a file" on his opponents. It won't matter what's in the file. It's simply an excuse to attack opponents with lawsuits. This is old hat for Trump. He's cornered, and he's going back to what he knows.

Trump already knows his enemies he hardly needs to make a list, he isn't Santa Claus. You and a lot of other folks are just making shit up as if Obama didn't do exactly the same thing.

I'm pretending no such thing. Obama was much better at it. Trump's biggest sin isn't that he's a con man. It's that he's a bad con man.

 

[Flopper]

Yes

No,

Good for them.

There are, indeed, some uses for States' Rights, after all.

The idea of the Government of the United States demanding to know how its citizens voted during the course of a Secret Ballot is downright UN-American.

This isn't Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy or Soviet Russia.

Yet.

Let's keep it that way.

Else be haunted by the ghosts of every Patriot who shed his blood for our People and their Republic and its Constitution.

And be condemned by our own grandchildren and their grandchildren, for our cowardice and lemming behavior.

For shame, Drumpf !!!

How they voted? Is that is what is being asked?

No but they have asked for birth dates, felony conviction information, and social security info. That information is considered confidential.

You are making that up. the governor of PA said that the Trump Administration can get the information just like anyone else, just pay 20 dollars.

Much to do over nothing.

Yes, and he will get it just like anyone else, over 600 million records of raw data with no social numbers or birth dates to match on. No state releases birth dates and social security numbers to the public.

I am not positive what people are so damn scared of. Do they think Pence is going to look at the list, determine who is a democrat and then send the IRS after them? I can understand the concern since that is pretty much what Obama did do.

But what in the hell difference does it make if someone knows your party affiliation? Like that is hard to determine? What I am thinking is you all are scared of what might turn up. Maybe every election in every state is rampant with fraud, that is why their is resistance. Maybe still the commission will find no fraud, that should make everyone happy. But if they do it sure would be nice to have the information to back it up.

Me thinks that the establishment is the one opposing this using the guise of privacy, which is BS.

The objection by states are based on three things.
First and foremost, the investigation can't uncover voter fraud because the data is not sufficient to do that. It will simply determine that registration files are filled with dead voters and voters that have moved. The states are well aware of that but they don't have the mechanism in place to straighten out the problems because of a lack of authority by legislatures and no way to track voter movement and deaths.

Second, the make up of the commission is all wrong to get to the real problems. Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach will actually be leading the investigation. He is a long term advocate of overturning the 1993 National Voter Registration Act which has added millions to voter rolls. He is also an outspoken advocate of expanded and strict registration requirements. Furthermore Kobach has openly supported the Trump claims about election fraud. The remainder of the commission lacks any real experience in managing elections or knowledge of election data. It is obviously what the conclusion of the commission will be regardless of the data.

Third, many states can not provide some of the data requested such as social security numbers and date of birth because of state laws. Others are refusing to provide this data because it is not considered public information. Also, most states will not provide records for people that have legal exceptions to the public record law. Some of the states files will contain many inactive records that can only be purged by using data not requested by the commission. In other words, the data that would be provide will generate a huge number of mismatches between federal databases and will show large numbers of duplication between counties and states. This will allow the commission to report a huge potential for voter fraud which in reality is caused by the structure of data.

The states are doing the right thing by refusing to be a part of this political witch hunt.

 

[OKTexas]

Says the party of no. LMAO


.

No worries. If you can't make your own case, there must not have been much of a case to begin with.

Your willful stupidity isn't making you case either. I've proven that States are prohibited form verifying citizenship, so far you haven't proven shit.


.

There's nothing I need to prove. You haven't proven that election fraud is so rampant, that the 2016 election needs to be audited.

Since when is proof required for you ignorant asses, you have 6 investigations of collusion with Russia with no proof. You fucking commies claim there needs to be an investigation to find proof, funny how that only works for investigation you want. Hypocrite much?


.

Aww, you poor, thing. Seems you're so frustrated because you can't prove there's enough voter fraud to warrant an audit of more than 130 million votes. Fortunately, the states know better than you and so far, at least 44 states refuse to comply with Trump's request.

Run along hypocrite, we're done, I'll put you down in the favor fraud column.


.

 

[OKTexas]

...Voting HISTORY is not "how they voted" as you stated. I can ask you if you voted last year there is nothing wrong with that question and there really isn't much reason for you not to answer. But when I ask whom you voted for then there is a problem. Voting history is NOT the same as how they voted. Voting history is a public record. I am not sure what the issue is other then the states grandstanding.

You and I have interpreted this differently.

I do believe that a fair number of State Attorneys General have interpreted the request in the very same way that I did.

Oh, and, by the way...

I you have my Registered Party Affiliation...

And you know whether or not I voted in Election A or B...

You can guess WHOM I voted for in Election A or B, now, can't you?

Plus-or-minus a few percentage points for error, when spread across an entire population.

Sorry.

No Sale.

Sure I can, if I know what county you live in I can get voter list by party any day of the week, it's public information. They give it to the political parties every cycle.


.

 

[OKTexas]

...So the States can release all that info to the private political parties but not the feds, got it..

Bingo... nobody trusts your Boy and his Minions with such sensitive data... with good reason, according to 44 State Attorneys General

Poor thing, do you need a safe space.


.

 

[OKTexas]

...The point is there is a lot more that can be done that isn't now and ignorant people just don't give a shit. That tells me they favor fraud. .

Incorrect.

It merely tells you that they favor the public presentation of credible preliminary evidence of wrongdoing, before they will comply with such a request...

• Present the evidence, and many of them will change their tune...
  
  
• Fail to present the evidence and you're gonna be waiting for the data until Hell freezes over...

Hope that helps as an aid to understanding...

We have more evidence than you regressives did for the collusion investigation.


.

 

[Faun]

No worries. If you can't make your own case, there must not have been much of a case to begin with.

Your willful stupidity isn't making you case either. I've proven that States are prohibited form verifying citizenship, so far you haven't proven shit.


.

There's nothing I need to prove. You haven't proven that election fraud is so rampant, that the 2016 election needs to be audited.

Since when is proof required for you ignorant asses, you have 6 investigations of collusion with Russia with no proof. You fucking commies claim there needs to be an investigation to find proof, funny how that only works for investigation you want. Hypocrite much?


.

Aww, you poor, thing. Seems you're so frustrated because you can't prove there's enough voter fraud to warrant an audit of more than 130 million votes. Fortunately, the states know better than you and so far, at least 44 states refuse to comply with Trump's request.

Run along hypocrite, we're done, I'll put you down in the favor fraud column.


.

LOLOL

Meaningless drivel. I would have been impressed had you actually found some evidence of rampant voter fraud.

 

[Kondor3]

...That tells me that a lot of people want to suppress minority voting.

Perhaps.

Within a given locale...

When welfare recipient numbers reach a point which they either outnumber taxpayers or hit that Magic Ratio where welfare cannot be sustained by local contributions...

You've gotta do something to cull the herd, and keep the riff-raff from voting themselves more bennies...

Sounds damned harsh...

But it's also damned honest - and realistic - the way it's always been, on the macro level, and the way it must be, to avoid creation of a Dolist (on the dole) State...

The trick is, to keep the Shell Game going, so's that the Welfare Folk don't realize what's going on, or, at least, prevents them from confirming it...

That's why the Good Lord invented Spin-Doctoring and Gerrymandering...

Oh, and... Plausible Deniability... in this context ("No, no suppression at-work here, just fraud-audits using personal data")... yeah... that's the ticket...

 

[Kondor3]

...Voting HISTORY is not "how they voted" as you stated. I can ask you if you voted last year there is nothing wrong with that question and there really isn't much reason for you not to answer. But when I ask whom you voted for then there is a problem. Voting history is NOT the same as how they voted. Voting history is a public record. I am not sure what the issue is other then the states grandstanding.

You and I have interpreted this differently.

I do believe that a fair number of State Attorneys General have interpreted the request in the very same way that I did.

Oh, and, by the way...

I you have my Registered Party Affiliation...

And you know whether or not I voted in Election A or B...

You can guess WHOM I voted for in Election A or B, now, can't you?

Plus-or-minus a few percentage points for error, when spread across an entire population.

Sorry.

No Sale.

there is no way to tell how a person voted. For a Republican to win in most democrat areas then democrats have to cross vote.

Besides your party affiliation is public information.

Correct.

There is no way to tell with certainty, unless that, too, is tracked by an individual State.

However, there is an EASY way to GUESS with a HIGH PROBABILITY OF ACCURACY, now, isn't there?

I have just illustrated how one utilizes logic and existing data to extrapolate that high-probability guess.

If you deny the existence of that state of affairs, then I cannot be of further service to you in this discussion.

And... sadly... for you-and-yours... very few people trust Your Boy or his Minions with even THAT level of personal data.

They don't even want Your Boy and Company to even make that intelligent guess.

It's a Trust Issue... on a national scale... how sad for you.

Perhaps that, too, will prove to be an aid to understanding, regarding why nobody wants to give the Commission such information.

 

[Kondor3]

...Voting HISTORY is not "how they voted" as you stated. I can ask you if you voted last year there is nothing wrong with that question and there really isn't much reason for you not to answer. But when I ask whom you voted for then there is a problem. Voting history is NOT the same as how they voted. Voting history is a public record. I am not sure what the issue is other then the states grandstanding.

You and I have interpreted this differently.

I do believe that a fair number of State Attorneys General have interpreted the request in the very same way that I did.

Oh, and, by the way...

I you have my Registered Party Affiliation...

And you know whether or not I voted in Election A or B...

You can guess WHOM I voted for in Election A or B, now, can't you?

Plus-or-minus a few percentage points for error, when spread across an entire population.

Sorry.

No Sale.

Your voting history, whether you like it or not, is "public information". It can be purchased by candidates, campaigns and journalists.

On a state-by-state basis, some of the information being requested is, indeed, publicly available, and some of it is not, correct?

 

[Seawytch]

...Voting HISTORY is not "how they voted" as you stated. I can ask you if you voted last year there is nothing wrong with that question and there really isn't much reason for you not to answer. But when I ask whom you voted for then there is a problem. Voting history is NOT the same as how they voted. Voting history is a public record. I am not sure what the issue is other then the states grandstanding.

You and I have interpreted this differently.

I do believe that a fair number of State Attorneys General have interpreted the request in the very same way that I did.

Oh, and, by the way...

I you have my Registered Party Affiliation...

And you know whether or not I voted in Election A or B...

You can guess WHOM I voted for in Election A or B, now, can't you?

Plus-or-minus a few percentage points for error, when spread across an entire population.

Sorry.

No Sale.

Your voting history, whether you like it or not, is "public information". It can be purchased by candidates, campaigns and journalists.

On a state-by-state basis, some of the information being requested is, indeed, publicly available, and some of it is not, correct?

Yes. SSNs and DLs are not included in data provided candidates, but your party affiliation, your voting history, including which party ballot you were given in a primary, are public record.

 

[charwin95]

My point is that there is no proof of collusion but still an investigation. Why not apply the same standard to voter fraud? Maybe because Democrats benefit by voter fraud?

The left is upset because Trump is going to deport most of their voters.
And as far as voter data is concerned, those states will change their feeble minds.

Wanna bet?

Kris Kobach's Own State Just Defied His Bogus 'Election Integrity' Commission

Even the state of Kansas told Kris Kobach to go fuck himself.

Where I come from this is what we call getting the taste bitch slapped out of your mouth.

And there isn't anything they can do about it but take it.

Once again you admit no collusion between Russia and Trump


.

Why don't you read Skew post instead of inserting another dumb post?

So let me repeat it for you even ------ Kobach own state told him to go fuck himself. What that tells you?

How is it dumb?

Once again a little girl is in jail for it, you don't even need to be a lawyer.. To destroy the claim that Trump was in collusion with the Russians to destroy this evidence..

He was talking about Kobach you inserted Russian collusions.
Russian collusions investigation still on going. And only person that keep saying that there is none is your cult leader.

 

[charwin95]

Twenty-four states have defied Trump’s request for sensitive voter information data, as they are refusing to turn over personal information to the unstable president.

Ari Berman of The Nation has the updated listed:


Follow
Ari Berman

[emoji818]@AriBerman
24 states won't provide voter data to Kobach: AZ, CA, CT, IN, KY, MA, MN, MS, NC, NM, ND, NV, NY, OH, OK, PA, RI, SD, TN, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI

6:05 PM - 30 Jun 2017

• 
  
• 
  1,1881,188 Retweets
  
• 
  2,4582,458 likes

Twitter Ads info and privacy




The Secretary of State in Mississippi told Trump to go jump in the Gulf of Mexico. The home state of the man leading Trump’s voter suppression charge, Kansas Sec. of State Kris Kobach turned down his request for voter data.

The panel which was born out of Trump’s false belief that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote because of people voting illegally has turned into another black eye and a complete fiasco for this White House.

The smart thing to do would be for the White House to quietly announce over the holiday weekend that they are putting the commission on hold for the time being, and then never speak of it again. Since this is the Trump administration, they will probably attack the states that refuse to turn over the voter data, and claim that since Trump is president, he can do whatever he wants.

It’s ironic that just days before America’s Independence Day holiday, the states are celebrating their independence by defying a request from a president who is becoming more like King George III with each passing day of his presidency.


24 States Have Defied Trump And Are Refusing His Request For Voter Information

And if they don't turn it over, the orange assclown is going to do what?

Finally both Republicans and Democrats agree. Trump has gone too far with his nonsense.

Trump is like a little kid ------- -Always doing something dumb.

He is turning this country into a chaos and upside down.

Once again you look in a mirror and find out your own kind is staring at you in the face .



.

Oh Bear------ you need to tell that to your Trump because he is the creator of chaos and discombobulations.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Twenty-four states have defied Trump’s request for sensitive voter information data, as they are refusing to turn over personal information to the unstable president.

Ari Berman of The Nation has the updated listed:


Follow
Ari Berman

✔@AriBerman
24 states won't provide voter data to Kobach: AZ, CA, CT, IN, KY, MA, MN, MS, NC, NM, ND, NV, NY, OH, OK, PA, RI, SD, TN, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI

6:05 PM - 30 Jun 2017

• 
  
• 
  1,1881,188 Retweets
  
• 
  2,4582,458 likes

Twitter Ads info and privacy




The Secretary of State in Mississippi told Trump to go jump in the Gulf of Mexico. The home state of the man leading Trump’s voter suppression charge, Kansas Sec. of State Kris Kobach turned down his request for voter data.

The panel which was born out of Trump’s false belief that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote because of people voting illegally has turned into another black eye and a complete fiasco for this White House.

The smart thing to do would be for the White House to quietly announce over the holiday weekend that they are putting the commission on hold for the time being, and then never speak of it again. Since this is the Trump administration, they will probably attack the states that refuse to turn over the voter data, and claim that since Trump is president, he can do whatever he wants.

It’s ironic that just days before America’s Independence Day holiday, the states are celebrating their independence by defying a request from a president who is becoming more like King George III with each passing day of his presidency.


24 States Have Defied Trump And Are Refusing His Request For Voter Information

And if they don't turn it over, the orange assclown is going to do what?

The data that was turned over was higher than reported, some data could not be reported because of the way the voter roles are made up. Many state could not be sent due to the party is declared at the time of the in the primaries vote. Each person has to declare the party that they are voting for. So I don't think the Progressive numbers are very true.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Isn't that the same thing that oshitass spent 100 million trying to get out of them and didn't? I thought so!!!

If he wants it all he will have to do is have the DOJ file a Freedom of information request, and they will give it up without personally sensitive information.

The federal election commission can require them to certify an updated roll to accept their states vote tally certification too. Guess only really unstable psychotic leftist fanatics think this type of monumental leap of fantasy is news.

You should put in on a list to remember Obammas little helper that worked for the Federal Voters comm, This woman was hired and worked for the FEC
Ravel, who has previously called for regulation of political websites such as The Drudge Report, stated that without regulation of the internet and digital platforms, the role of the FEC will essentially become obsolete as the FEC focuses mainly on TV and radio content.

 

[charwin95]

Yes

No,

Good for them.

There are, indeed, some uses for States' Rights, after all.

The idea of the Government of the United States demanding to know how its citizens voted during the course of a Secret Ballot is downright UN-American.

This isn't Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy or Soviet Russia.

Yet.

Let's keep it that way.

Else be haunted by the ghosts of every Patriot who shed his blood for our People and their Republic and its Constitution.

And be condemned by our own grandchildren and their grandchildren, for our cowardice and lemming behavior.

For shame, Drumpf !!!

How they voted? Is that is what is being asked?

No but they have asked for birth dates, felony conviction information, and social security info. That information is considered confidential.

You are making that up. the governor of PA said that the Trump Administration can get the information just like anyone else, just pay 20 dollars.

Much to do over nothing.

Yes, and he will get it just like anyone else, over 600 million records of raw data with no social numbers or birth dates to match on. No state releases birth dates and social security numbers to the public.

I am not positive what people are so damn scared of. Do they think Pence is going to look at the list, determine who is a democrat and then send the IRS after them? I can understand the concern since that is pretty much what Obama did do.

But what in the hell difference does it make if someone knows your party affiliation? Like that is hard to determine? What I am thinking is you all are scared of what might turn up. Maybe every election in every state is rampant with fraud, that is why their is resistance. Maybe still the commission will find no fraud, that should make everyone happy. But if they do it sure would be nice to have the information to back it up.

Me thinks that the establishment is the one opposing this using the guise of privacy, which is BS.

The commission is asking more than just political affiliation. You are forgetting something both red and blue states total of 44 and counting rejected Trump request ------ Are you saying they are all scared? The Americans had spoken.
What is the integrity of this commission headed by Kobach? He was sued and sued because of his actions about voting suppressions. Who in the right mind that will use this kind of person to head this commission? Trump.
What do you think will happen if he found out that Trump supporters committed most of these fraud?
If you can prove that there is a massive fraud during election that will be a different story. So far NONE.

 

[charwin95]

Yes

No,
No but they have asked for birth dates, felony conviction information, and social security info. That information is considered confidential.

You are making that up. the governor of PA said that the Trump Administration can get the information just like anyone else, just pay 20 dollars.

Much to do over nothing.

Yes, and he will get it just like anyone else, over 600 million records of raw data with no social numbers or birth dates to match on. No state releases birth dates and social security numbers to the public.

I am not positive what people are so damn scared of. Do they think Pence is going to look at the list, determine who is a democrat and then send the IRS after them? I can understand the concern since that is pretty much what Obama did do.

But what in the hell difference does it make if someone knows your party affiliation? Like that is hard to determine? What I am thinking is you all are scared of what might turn up. Maybe every election in every state is rampant with fraud, that is why their is resistance. Maybe still the commission will find no fraud, that should make everyone happy. But if they do it sure would be nice to have the information to back it up.

Me thinks that the establishment is the one opposing this using the guise of privacy, which is BS.

This isn't about individual voters. It's strong arm politics. Trump is "building a file" on his opponents. It won't matter what's in the file. It's simply an excuse to attack opponents with lawsuits. This is old hat for Trump. He's cornered, and he's going back to what he knows.

Trump already knows his enemies he hardly needs to make a list, he isn't Santa Claus. You and a lot of other folks are just making shit up as if Obama didn't do exactly the same thing.

Politics always have enemies but Trump created more enemies than anybody he can imagine. His divisive speech me against him or you against me. Trump is dividing this country big time because of pure ignorance and stupidity.
Last week in his speech ---- *I'm the president and they are Not* Whom is he talking too? The North Koreans?
ISIS?
This is not the America I grow up with. It is quite disgusting.

 

[charwin95]

...Voting HISTORY is not "how they voted" as you stated. I can ask you if you voted last year there is nothing wrong with that question and there really isn't much reason for you not to answer. But when I ask whom you voted for then there is a problem. Voting history is NOT the same as how they voted. Voting history is a public record. I am not sure what the issue is other then the states grandstanding.

You and I have interpreted this differently.

I do believe that a fair number of State Attorneys General have interpreted the request in the very same way that I did.

Oh, and, by the way...

I you have my Registered Party Affiliation...

And you know whether or not I voted in Election A or B...

You can guess WHOM I voted for in Election A or B, now, can't you?

Plus-or-minus a few percentage points for error, when spread across an entire population.

Sorry.

No Sale.

Your voting history, whether you like it or not, is "public information". It can be purchased by candidates, campaigns and journalists.

Incorrect. You can request individually with a name but they will not give you that information of the entire states.
If its that simple why didn't this dude Kobach did it himself?

 

[Seawytch]

...Voting HISTORY is not "how they voted" as you stated. I can ask you if you voted last year there is nothing wrong with that question and there really isn't much reason for you not to answer. But when I ask whom you voted for then there is a problem. Voting history is NOT the same as how they voted. Voting history is a public record. I am not sure what the issue is other then the states grandstanding.

You and I have interpreted this differently.

I do believe that a fair number of State Attorneys General have interpreted the request in the very same way that I did.

Oh, and, by the way...

I you have my Registered Party Affiliation...

And you know whether or not I voted in Election A or B...

You can guess WHOM I voted for in Election A or B, now, can't you?

Plus-or-minus a few percentage points for error, when spread across an entire population.

Sorry.

No Sale.

Your voting history, whether you like it or not, is "public information". It can be purchased by candidates, campaigns and journalists.

Incorrect. You can request individually with a name but they will not give you that information of the entire states.
If its that simple why didn't this dude Kobach did it himself?

Yes they do. It is in the data provided to candidates and campaigns. In the data I provide I have two formats, five elections worth of voting history in a single file or all the voters history in two files.