Do absentee abllots in PA support or abet voter fraud?

[nehalem256]

I do love the disingenuous reference to 1868, when there were absolutely no forms of voter ID at all.

You mean like the Democrats want now.

Anyone with a laser printer could create a fake phone bill in about 5 minutes.

 

[Jhhnn]

You mean like the Democrats want now.

Anyone with a laser printer could create a fake phone bill in about 5 minutes.

And a state driver's license, or SS card, not to mention that they could fake a voter's signature, too. Only in the minds of fringewhacks & those out to limit the franchise would such thoughts even occur, or be presented as likely.

If Bigfoot could do it, then anybody could do it.

 

[nehalem256]

And a state driver's license, or SS card, not to mention that they could fake a voter's signature, too. Only in the minds of fringewhacks & those out to limit the franchise would such thoughts even occur, or be presented as likely.

If Bigfoot could do it, then anybody could do it.

You can make driver's licenses on your laser printer?

 

[monovillage]

I do love the disingenuous reference to 1868, when there were absolutely no forms of voter ID at all.

Perhaps another part of the article better explains what's going on-

It's no surprise that the Bush Admin didn't support the suit or bring it on behalf of voters, or that an authoritarian conservative court upheld the Indiana statute.

Here's the entire quote that Jhhnn cut short for obvious reasons.

Lawyers who challenged the case cited the experience of one would-be Indiana voter, Valerie Williams, who was turned away from the polling place in November 2006 by officials who told her that a telephone bill, a Social Security letter with her address and an expired driver’s license were no longer sufficient.

“Of course, I threw a fit,” she said in a January interview with The New York Times, recalling how she cast a provisional ballot which was never counted. Ms. Williams, in her early 60’s, is black — and is a Republican.

 

[Jhhnn]

You can make driver's licenses on your laser printer?

Passable fakes, sure. Anything that will withstand much scrutiny- no.

There's not much scrutiny at polling places in that regard. If it looks like a driver's license, it is a driver's license, or at least it was though the scratched up plastic window in my wallet.

What we really need are dna tests, retinal scans, fingerprints & anal probes, just to be sure that nobody, and I mean nobody, will get past security measures. As if they'd bother, and as if the very few who get past current non- photo ID measures matter in the slightest.

 

[cybrsage]

Just so Jhhnn cannot claim to have not seen it:

Now it's OK to suppress voters because they're "lazy".

Any legal justification for that?

Voter Registration set a pretty fine legal precedent. If you are too lazy to register to vote, you are not allowed to vote.

 

[Jhhnn]

Here's the entire quote that Jhhnn cut short for obvious reasons.

So what? Repubs will screw over their own if it means screwing over more of the other team, which is the obvious intent.

You need to break some eggs to make an omelette... and the prospect frightens them not at all.

 

[Jhhnn]

Just so Jhhnn cannot claim to have not seen it:




Voter Registration set a pretty fine legal precedent. If you are too lazy to register to vote, you are not allowed to vote.

Registration? Soooo lame. Most people can register online.

Clickety clickety clack, tap, tap, enter. done.

Those who can't can usually obtain the forms online or from a variety of sources, register for the price of a stamp.

False equivalence is Righties' best friend.

 

[cybrsage]

Registration? Soooo lame. Most people can register online.

Clickety clickety clack, tap, tap, enter. done.

Those who can't can usually obtain the forms online or from a variety of sources, register for the price of a stamp.

False equivalence is Righties' best friend.

None of the tripe you just posted actually counters what I said.

"If you are too lazy to register to vote, you are not allowed to vote."

 

[Anarchist420]

The Republican Party loves staging elections when they could just be honest and say "we control the PA legislature, and the people of PA aren't going to vote for Presidential electors"... and that's still well within their rights to do so, even in the Post-Counter-Revolution U.S. Federal Constitution.

It's a giant waste of resources (at least for the common man) to have a fake election.

 

[nehalem256]

Passable fakes, sure. Anything that will withstand much scrutiny- no.

There's not much scrutiny at polling places in that regard. If it looks like a driver's license, it is a driver's license, or at least it was though the scratched up plastic window in my wallet.

What we really need are dna tests, retinal scans, fingerprints & anal probes, just to be sure that nobody, and I mean nobody, will get past security measures. As if they'd bother, and as if the very few who get past current non- photo ID measures matter in the slightest.

Which I assume is why I have always had to take it out of my wallet.

Registration? Soooo lame. Most people can register online.

Clickety clickety clack, tap, tap, enter. done.

Those who can't can usually obtain the forms online or from a variety of sources, register for the price of a stamp.

False equivalence is Righties' best friend.

Sounds like a poll tax to me. Why are you in favor of a poll tax?

 

[Jhhnn]

None of the tripe you just posted actually counters what I said.

"If you are too lazy to register to vote, you are not allowed to vote."

It counters your false equivalency. Registering to vote and obtaining ID require entirely different levels of effort for apparently more than just a few people.

 

[nehalem256]

It counters your false equivalency. Registering to vote and obtaining ID require entirely different levels of effort for apparently more than just a few people.

Given that the vast majority of people already have ID for things other than voting it would seem that registering to vote actually requires more effort.

So by your own logic requiring registration actually suppresses more votes.

 

[Jhhnn]

Given that the vast majority of people already have ID for things other than voting it would seem that registering to vote actually requires more effort.

So by your own logic requiring registration actually suppresses more votes.

My logic? Or your trollishness?

There's no registration in N Dakota. There probably wasn't in Tammany's NYC, either. Are you advocating that?

I don't think so. I think you're just defending Team Republican by any means possible.

 

[tweaker2]

Every Repub controlled State that created "Voter Fraud" laws could have worded their language that would not have disenfranchised any voter that could legally vote before those laws were passed. The Repubs chose not to. Why is that?

Only Repub controlled States/Municipalities have passed "Voter Fraud" laws. Why is that?

There is overwhelming evidence that possible disinfranchisement can occur that would have a major influence on the outcome of an election, invariably in favor of voters that lean Repub and against those who vote Dem. Instead of being sensitive to this problem and addressing these issues on a point by point basis to make certain that noone is disinfranchised by these newly enacted laws, the Repubs rammed these laws into effect under strenuous objection by those who noticed the harmful effects these laws would cause. The Repubs CHOSE to ignore those concerns, where they could have easily addressed and corrected any problems to everyone's satisfaction. Why is that?

Is this the behavior of a party that is truly seeking a fair and correct electoral process?

The Repub controlled legislatures/admins could have went out of their way to add language into their newly minted "voter Fraud" laws that would have decreased disinfranchisement and actually promoted more legal voter turnout. Instead, they, in nation-wide lock-step uniformity decided to do just the opposite. Why is that?

The supporters of these newly enacted laws can apply any kind of evasive logic they choose to defend such newly enacted laws. However, their special kind of logic that created these new laws cannot defy the overwhelming "law of common sense". Nor can their kind of prejudiced reasoning defy the logically deduced conclusion that voter suppression against those that would tend to vote Democratic is the goal of every one of these so-called exclusively Repub enacted "Voter Fraud Laws".

It's very easy to pick out the folks that are hopping around wearing bright red shirts with one foot in their mouth that's distorting their speaking and both index fingers that's plugging their ears.

 

[cybrsage]

It counters your false equivalency. Registering to vote and obtaining ID require entirely different levels of effort for apparently more than just a few people.

No, it is not, but keep telling yourself that.

 

[cybrsage]

Only Repub controlled States/Municipalities have passed "Voter Fraud" laws. Why is that?

Because DEM controleld states/municipalites do not want anyone to know the identity of the person when he "claims" to be someone.

Thanks for asking, I hope it clears things up for you.

 

[Pens1566]

189 days is not "last minute". It is 7.5 months.

You are now saying "since they did not do it years ago, they should never do it". Bad reason to not do something.

Not only are you a troll, you suck at math.

 

[nehalem256]

Every Repub controlled State that created "Voter Fraud" laws could have worded their language that would not have disenfranchised any voter that could legally vote before those laws were passed. The Repubs chose not to. Why is that?

And how would the Republicans have avoided disenfranchising any voter you could legally vote before? Hmm. They added the reasonable and common-sense provision of offering ID for free.

Only Repub controlled States/Municipalities have passed "Voter Fraud" laws. Why is that?

Because those that are likely to vote fraudulently, such as illegal immigrants, vote Democrat. Why has Barack Obama spent so much time pandering to a group that cannot vote for him?

 

[Greenman]

And how would the Republicans have avoided disenfranchising any voter you could legally vote before? Hmm. They added the reasonable and common-sense provision of offering ID for free.




Because those that are likely to vote fraudulently, such as illegal immigrants, vote Democrat. Why has Barack Obama spent so much time pandering to a group that cannot vote for him?

This is the entire issue. All the hand wringing about "disenfranchised voters" is bullshit. It's about illegal aliens voting democrat. If they voted republican every liberal on this board would be screaming for voter id.

 

[HomerJS]

You mean like the Democrats want now.

Anyone with a laser printer could create a fake phone bill in about 5 minutes.

I assume that same laser printer can recreate the signature in the register that you have to sign again in person in front of a poll worker so they can compare.


I'll wait...........................

 

[HomerJS]

This is the entire issue. All the hand wringing about "disenfranchised voters" is bullshit. It's about illegal aliens voting democrat. If they voted republican every liberal on this board would be screaming for voter id.

So how many of these have occurred to warrant enacting a new law?

We do know when the Bush admin investigated 2000-2007 there were 86 cases of in person voter fraud in over 300 million votes

While were at it why not a new law outlawing stealing girl scout cookies.

 

[HomerJS]

Being stupid is something you cannot do anything about - you are born that way. Being poor is not something you can always do something about. Getting a free ID in less than 189 days is something you can easily do something about.

Assuming you can get a copy or your original BC. What if you are from out of state and have to get your BC?

BTW - Just found out the state of PA has budgeted for only 75,000 voter ID cards when 750,000 don't have proper photo ID.

Any idea why Republicans are suspending/cutting back early voting?

How do we ID incoming absentee ballots?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Hmm...monovillage conveniently has ignored the accusations about all of this being a pretense for getting rid of minority voters that would vote for Dem's.I mean he should be all over this, someone from his own party is admitting there is no real voter fraud, it's all about disenfranchising voters.

Must be nice to just ignore things that are inconvenient or otherwise hurtful to his position.

 

[Greenman]

So how many of these have occurred to warrant enacting a new law?

We do know when the Bush admin investigated 2000-2007 there were 86 cases of in person voter fraud in over 300 million votes

While were at it why not a new law outlawing stealing girl scout cookies.

If that 86 number is correct, I personally know about 40% of all the fraudulent voters who caste ballots between 2000 and 2007. That's a pretty stunning number.