Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Farang
A Republican is going to complain to me about voter fraud?
..really?
Is somebody complaining to you?
Yes. Did you hit your head or something?
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Farang
A Republican is going to complain to me about voter fraud?
..really?
Is somebody complaining to you?
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
BTW Now we know what Democrats are so against the need for an ID to vote. Much easier to cheat when you don't have to show an ID. Register many times in multiple places with fake names and then show up and vote 3 or 4 times on election day. But if you need an ID it becomes MUCH harder.
C'mon PJ....you know that that statement is an outright lie. The Dems are not against showing an ID to vote. They are against having people being forced to get a government issued ID to vote at their own expense of time and money.
You can still use a utility bill as proof of residence in a voting district which doesn't cost the individual anything. No one gets to vote without showing some kind of proof that they are who they say they are or reside where they say that they do.
And you know that. Your desperation has resulted in your selling out of your morals. You are now resorting to known falsehoods to try to make a bogus point.
Originally posted by: loki8481
saw a blurb on the news this morning about some county in Indiana that had more registered voters than it has residents. seemed a little weird, maybe the undead have endorsed Obama this year?
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I am not crying about cheating you dumb ass.
-snip-
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
BTW Now we know what Democrats are so against the need for an ID to vote. Much easier to cheat when you don't have to show an ID. Register many times in multiple places with fake names and then show up and vote 3 or 4 times on election day. But if you need an ID it becomes MUCH harder.
C'mon PJ....you know that that statement is an outright lie. The Dems are not against showing an ID to vote. They are against having people being forced to get a government issued ID to vote at their own expense of time and money.
You can still use a utility bill as proof of residence in a voting district which doesn't cost the individual anything. No one gets to vote without showing some kind of proof that they are who they say they are or reside where they say that they do.
And you know that. Your desperation has resulted in your selling out of your morals. You are now resorting to known falsehoods to try to make a bogus point.
Originally posted by: loki8481
saw a blurb on the news this morning about some county in Indiana that had more registered voters than it has residents. seemed a little weird, maybe the undead have endorsed Obama this year?
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I am not crying about cheating you dumb ass.
-snip-
Well, I am.
To those arguing about the rate of cheaters caught - the real number is certainly higher. How high? We don't know, but for anybody to pooh-pooh this problem is ridiculous and I must conclude is based upon partisan-driven irrationality. We should all be concerned about violations of our voting system - and not just when it hurts our candidate.
IMO, it's a bad systen and a big problem when there is little to no disincentive to cheat. The "we'll just disqualify illegal voters when noticed" is no disincentive to cheat. The problem is not being taken seriously enough.
Reminds me of law enforcement around here where I live. People scam the elderly, trick them into signing Power of Attorney forms and then clean out their bank accounts. What happens when caught? They make them give the money back. Big F'ing deal, they just move on to the next victim.
Same with ACORN.
Fern
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I am not crying about cheating you dumb ass.
-snip-
Well, I am.
To those arguing about the rate of cheaters caught - the real number is certainly higher. How high? We don't know, but for anybody to pooh-pooh this problem is ridiculous and I must conclude is based upon partisan-driven irrationality. We should all be concerned about violations of our voting system - and not just when it hurts our candidate.
IMO, it's a bad systen and a big problem when there is little to no disincentive to cheat. The "we'll just disqualify illegal voters when noticed" is no disincentive to cheat. The problem is not being taken seriously enough.
Reminds me of law enforcement around here where I live. People scam the elderly, trick them into signing Power of Attorney forms and then clean out their bank accounts. What happens when caught? They make them give the money back. Big F'ing deal, they just move on to the next victim.
Same with ACORN.
Fern
Not being taken seriously enough? It was the subject of a massive outlay of law enforcement funds by the Bush administration. Do you know why they stopped? Because they simply couldn't find enough cases to justify it. A bipartisan governmental panel on voter fraud found widespread agreement among experts that in-person voter fraud is simply not an issue. Finally, the report also said that most experts believe that fraudulent registration has not translated into polling place fraud.
This has been repeatedly discussed before. The issue is not that fraud should not be dealt with when it does exist, it is that you guys are spending tons of time screaming about a type of fraud that is exceedingly rare, and low impact when it does occur instead of looking to address actual voter fraud issues.
You're being led around by the nose by partisans interested in suppressing votes.
Originally posted by: AAjax
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Not being taken seriously enough? It was the subject of a massive outlay of law enforcement funds by the Bush administration. Do you know why they stopped? Because they simply couldn't find enough cases to justify it. A bipartisan governmental panel on voter fraud found widespread agreement among experts that in-person voter fraud is simply not an issue. Finally, the report also said that most experts believe that fraudulent registration has not translated into polling place fraud.
This has been repeatedly discussed before. The issue is not that fraud should not be dealt with when it does exist, it is that you guys are spending tons of time screaming about a type of fraud that is exceedingly rare, and low impact when it does occur instead of looking to address actual voter fraud issues.
You're being led around by the nose by partisans interested in suppressing votes.
Pot, meet kettle
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I am not crying about cheating you dumb ass.
I have not even suggested that a McCain loss could be connected to this type of fraud.
I am talking about perception. If Democrats believe that Obama is getting all these new voters then they will believe that Obama HAS to win. And if the polls show Obama winning, as they do now, and he losses the reaction will be "he was cheated"
We already have people claiming that their will be riots if Obama losses. Imagine if Obama enters election day with a small lead in the polls, but ends up losing. All hell will break loose.
Massive wholesale fraud by groups like ACORN are undermining our system. This stuff must stop.
ACORN delenda est.
Originally posted by: yuppiejr
So what is the logic behind NOT having some form of state-issued photo ID required to confirm voter eligibility? Even if actual cases of voter fraud are limited the perception that the system is easy to game (which it is) exists - for relatively little effort, since a majority of Americans already have a drivers license, we could put improve both the actual and perception of fraud. Easy enough to set up a program to assist those who need transportation assistance or can't afford the $15 card fee...
People scream and yell about possible fraud with electronic voting yet I need less ID to select the next president than I do to write a check for $12 worth of groceries? Seriously?
I think you here crickets because yuppies post is a little confusing. His english is a little bad but thats OK...everyone does itOriginally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: yuppiejr
So what is the logic behind NOT having some form of state-issued photo ID required to confirm voter eligibility? Even if actual cases of voter fraud are limited the perception that the system is easy to game (which it is) exists - for relatively little effort, since a majority of Americans already have a drivers license, we could put improve both the actual and perception of fraud. Easy enough to set up a program to assist those who need transportation assistance or can't afford the $15 card fee...
People scream and yell about possible fraud with electronic voting yet I need less ID to select the next president than I do to write a check for $12 worth of groceries? Seriously?
Do you hear crickets? I hear crickets.
I bet they have cell phones though Amazing that there are so few safeguards in place to protect our most cherished and valued right. Sure, some people don't have photo IDs, but all U.S. Citizens surely have SOME form of indentification to prove their residence.I think the logic behind NOT having some form of state-issues ID is because it is exclusionary in nature. Meaning, some people dont have photo IDs.
I don't disagree with your points I think an ID would work towards closing a relatively small form of fraud.Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
I bet they have cell phones though Amazing that there are so few safeguards in place to protect our most cherished and valued right. Sure, some people don't have photo IDs, but all U.S. Citizens surely have SOME form of indentification to prove their residence.I think the logic behind NOT having some form of state-issues ID is because it is exclusionary in nature. Meaning, some people dont have photo IDs.
How many individuals are we excluding with strict rules VS how much fraud is corrupting our system via relatively non-existant safeguards.
Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Farang
A Republican is going to complain to me about voter fraud?
..really?
Is somebody complaining to you?
Yes. Did you hit your head or something?
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Not really gonna matter when Obama scores close to 75 million votes and McCain struggles to get 55 million ...
:laugh:
It would most likely be much greater if not for the Bradley Effect and the NeanderCon Fall Fear Campaign.
Originally posted by: OrByte
I think you here crickets because yuppies post is a little confusing. His english is a little bad but thats OK...everyone does itOriginally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: yuppiejr
So what is the logic behind NOT having some form of state-issued photo ID required to confirm voter eligibility? Even if actual cases of voter fraud are limited the perception that the system is easy to game (which it is) exists - for relatively little effort, since a majority of Americans already have a drivers license, we could put improve both the actual and perception of fraud. Easy enough to set up a program to assist those who need transportation assistance or can't afford the $15 card fee...
People scream and yell about possible fraud with electronic voting yet I need less ID to select the next president than I do to write a check for $12 worth of groceries? Seriously?
Do you hear crickets? I hear crickets.
But I think the jest of his post revolves around the idea that IDs should be required.
I think the logic behind NOT having some form of state-issues ID is because it is exclusionary in nature. Meaning, some people dont have photo IDs.
I guess you can argue good and bad, but from my understanding that is the logic behind not having some form of ID to vote.
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
I bet they have cell phones though Amazing that there are so few safeguards in place to protect our most cherished and valued right. Sure, some people don't have photo IDs, but all U.S. Citizens surely have SOME form of indentification to prove their residence.I think the logic behind NOT having some form of state-issues ID is because it is exclusionary in nature. Meaning, some people dont have photo IDs.
How many individuals are we excluding with strict rules VS how much fraud is corrupting our system via relatively non-existant safeguards.