Holder's Ballot Given to Young Man

Discussion in 'Politics and News' started by xBiffx, Apr 9, 2012.

  1. Pens1566

    Pens1566 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Messages:
    6,966
    Likes Received:
    381
    Did you not read that link, or just cherry pick what you thought might help your argument? Very first line :

     
  2. Moonbeam

    Moonbeam Elite Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 1999
    Messages:
    59,154
    Likes Received:
    408
    I know, you aren't scum, you are a good person who just happens to be blind, has to be blind, had to be blind to survive your childhood. The facts of this matter, however, are different than you believe. The amount of voter fraud is minimal and happens on both sides. The disenfranchisement practiced by Republicans is a major issue. Gore won Florida by only a few hundred votes despite Republican corruption which did manage to shift the election to the court where Bush won 5 to 4. And the facts are today that all kinds of public groups, including the league of women voters have abandoned registering voters there. The amount of Democratic voters coming onto the rolls has taken a very large dive. This is all due to Republican changes to the law to suppress voter registration. Reducing the number of folks who vote by election laws is undemocratic, that means unAmerican, and that means evil, or do you disagree. So you are evil but only because you're also ignorant. You would be different if you knew better, I am sure.

    Now I don't have links and I don't want to look for them, but I believe the facts in Florida's declining voter registration, etc. is real.
     
  3. Moonbeam

    Moonbeam Elite Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 1999
    Messages:
    59,154
    Likes Received:
    408
  4. FuzzyBee

    FuzzyBee Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2000
    Messages:
    5,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, you are. You just don't realize it because you're parroting the faulty data you've been presented.

    Thanks for trying to put words in my mouth. :rolleyes:

    What I'm saying is that you haven't been told how many trees are in the orchard, just that there are some trees. Without using all of the data, you've made a faulty approximation.
     
    #229 FuzzyBee, Apr 13, 2012
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2012
  5. FuzzyBee

    FuzzyBee Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2000
    Messages:
    5,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here comes the paranoia.
     
  6. FuzzyBee

    FuzzyBee Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2000
    Messages:
    5,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you don't have the ability to debate, insult.
     
  7. FuzzyBee

    FuzzyBee Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2000
    Messages:
    5,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    You still haven't address the faults in the solitary survey that you've referenced.
     
  8. Vic Vega

    Vic Vega Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    4,537
    Likes Received:
    1
    ...
     
    #233 Vic Vega, Apr 13, 2012
    Last edited: May 27, 2012
  9. micrometers

    micrometers Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2010
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    0
    the thing is this: it would take a lot of work to do this. You have to go in person and have all of the guy's information memorized. and all to cast one vote in a sea of millions.

    TO really have an impact, you would have to have thousands of people deliberately doing this. IT would likely take a few hours...basically, return is really low.
     
  10. FuzzyBee

    FuzzyBee Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2000
    Messages:
    5,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not really. In some states, all you have to do is show a phone bill.
     
  11. fskimospy

    fskimospy Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    48,545
    Likes Received:
    1,789
    No. I don't know how else to explain stats 101 to you.

    This is simply baffling, and the only reason I can see that you would say this is if you literally had no idea how hypothesis testing works. Then again, since its abundantly clear that you've never taken a single statistics class in your life, you probably don't have any idea how hypothesis testing works. (hint for you, you don't need to know the number of trees in the orchard in order to calculate margins of error)

    Not only is the Brennan Center's data fine, even if it weren't it would do literally nothing to help your point because the burden of proof is not on those who say voter fraud does not exist in significant amounts, it's on those who say it does. Speaking of that, how's that research on voter fraud coming anyway?
     
    #236 fskimospy, Apr 13, 2012
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2012
  12. FuzzyBee

    FuzzyBee Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2000
    Messages:
    5,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    The bolded is the key word. You (and others) are reporting a hypothesis as fact.

    The Brennan Center's data is *not* fine. Once again, if you were the statistics whiz you keep claiming to be, you'd be able to yank off your blinders and determine why it's not.

    You'll have to pardon me. Between a job, a wife, and a four-year-old, I don't have a lot of time to research data that the Brennan Center (which, I'd dare say, has more resources available than I do) can't seem to determine. Remember - not reporting data is not the same as reporting data that is zero.
     
  13. fskimospy

    fskimospy Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    48,545
    Likes Received:
    1,789
    No. It's now obvious that you don't even know the hypothesis that the Brennan Center was testing. If you had, you wouldn't have written this. For clarity's sake though, please tell me what you think their hypothesis was. (EDIT: Or to be more clear, as there were multiple hypotheses, what they were testing in relation to the prevalence of voter fraud)

    I'm not claiming to be a statistics whiz, although I do work with stats almost every day. I am a competent statistician however, and you are not. Their data is fine. Like I just told you, your 'gotcha' example about not knowing the number of trees is indicative of someone who has no clue as to what they are talking about. If you had, you would know that you can do estimates without population sizes.

    I don't really care how busy you are, if you can't put together some data to back up your claims, the smart thing to say is "I don't have that information", not proclaim something and then say you're going to find out how to prove it later.
     
  14. FuzzyBee

    FuzzyBee Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2000
    Messages:
    5,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    In other words, you are ignoring that you are stating whatever their results are as fact. Pretty intellectually dishonest (or is it just pure intellectual laziness?)
    [/quote]
    I'm not claiming to be a statistics whiz, although I do work with stats almost every day. I am a competent statistician however, and you are not. Their data is fine. Like I just told you, your 'gotcha' example about not knowing the number of trees is indicative of someone who has no clue as to what they are talking about. If you had, you would know that you can do estimates without population sizes.[/quote]

    I'm sure you are an abundantly competent statistician. That said, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground if you are stating results extrapolated from statistics as fact.

    I can't tell you off the top of my head how many people were murdered yesterday. Does that mean that there's no murder problem?

    It must to be nice to live in a Candyland world where everything falls into it's own little neat statistical pile, and "Republicans" are the source of all evil. Let me know when you join the rest of the real world.
     
  15. fskimospy

    fskimospy Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    48,545
    Likes Received:
    1,789
    I notice you didn't tell me what you think their tested hypothesis was. I am not repeating their results as fact, I am repeating their results which showcase the lack of evidence for your position. Again, you have mixed up the burden of proof.

    The hypothesis under test in relation to voter fraud was something to the effect of "there exists a significant amount of voter fraud in US elections". They did not find any evidence for this, therefore the hypothesis could not be supported.

    As I stated above, you have confused an expression of the lack of evidence for your position to be an affirmative argument to the contrary.

    This is an awful analogy. What do you mean by 'murder problem'? Does the existence of a single murder in the whole country mean that the US has a murder problem? The question here is not if voter fraud exists at all, it is if it exists to an amount large enough to require a legislative response. For that sort of determination you would most certainly need a good idea of how often it was happening, which is of course the whole point of this discussion. There is no evidence for it happening to a significant extent.
     
  16. FuzzyBee

    FuzzyBee Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2000
    Messages:
    5,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    BTW, I find it funny that the Brennan Center "voter fraud" study that is so statistically based throws out this gem:

    As if it is fact, with nothing at all to substantiate it. (Don't bother looking at the endnote - it just complains about absentee voting fraud, which I also agree is a problem, but has nothing to do with their comment)
     
    #241 FuzzyBee, Apr 14, 2012
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2012
  17. micrometers

    micrometers Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2010
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    0
    Look man, that's still a lot of fucking work to commit vote fraud. You have to dig through someone's garbage or whatever. and all you get is one vote.

    And to cast that vote, you need to get a guy to stand in line for up to like an hour. And that same guy can't go by there again because the campaign workers will recognize him, so he needs to go to a different polling station.

    basically, it would require much complexity and manpower to really do something like this.

    This is an utterly fake issue drummed up by Republicans who have racist motivations IMO.
     
  18. Jhhnn

    Jhhnn Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 1999
    Messages:
    36,093
    Likes Received:
    1,486
    That's because there's little to nothing to substantiate your claims in the first place. Your conclusions require a leap of faith, whether you're capable of recognizing that, or not.
     
  19. Bowfinger

    Bowfinger Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2002
    Messages:
    15,542
    Likes Received:
    117
    Bump, since we had yet another voter ID thread started.
     
  20. Mxylplyx

    Mxylplyx Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Messages:
    4,173
    Likes Received:
    70
    This pretty much sums it up. Systematic, coordinated voter fraud would be almost impossible to hide in a free media society like ours. Are we really to believe that people are going to go through all the trouble and risk to register ONE VOTE?? The most effective way to steal elections would be to tamper with the ballot box (ie ballot stuffing), and voter ID laws would do NOTHING to affect this.

    This is nothing more than an attempt to disenfranchise voting constituencies that lean democratic. Quit lying to yourselves in attempting to proclaim otherwise, because deep down you know what you are doing.
     
  21. thraashman

    thraashman Lifer

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2000
    Messages:
    10,186
    Likes Received:
    270
    As you said, they know what they're doing. They're not lying to themselves at all, they're attempting to lie to the American public because if conservatives only talked when they were telling the truth, then Fox News would have to go off the air.
     
  22. Bowfinger

    Bowfinger Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2002
    Messages:
    15,542
    Likes Received:
    117
    Exactly. I'll give the masses the benefit of the doubt. I'm sure most are sincere in believing the lies about vote fraud and photo IDs, spread by the RNC propagnda machine. The Republican leaders are not so clueless, however. They know exactly what they're trying to do, and it has zero to do with voter fraud. It is a deliberate, calculated drive to suppress Democratic voters.