NAACP ask UN to investigate US voting rights laws

[fskimospy]

You could only find a small fraction and you know it.

Wrong.

 

[boochi]

You love these one word answers don't you?

 

[blankslate]

OK, you found one. Why don't you google voter fraud and see which side is implicated and convicted the most. It is'nt the right, its the left.

Why don't you take a look at the instances of voter fraud and see how often it occurs.

http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/pdf/TruthAboutVoterFraud.pdf

according to the case studies in the appendix of the report voter fraud occurred at less than a 0.001% rate throughout the states that were looked at.

look at page 6 of the report.

Royal Masset, the former political director for the Republican Party of Texas, concisely tied all of these strands together in a 2007 Houston Chronicle article concerning a highly controversial battle over photo identification legislation in Texas. Masset connected the inflated furor over voter fraud to photo identification laws and their expected impact on legitimate voters:

Among Republicans it is an “article of religious faith that voter fraud is causing us to lose elections,”
Masset said. He doesn’t agree with that, but does believe that requiring photo IDs could cause
enough of a dropoff in legitimate Democratic voting to add 3 percent to the Republican vote.

It's really too bad this has gotten politicized but if what Mr. Masset says is actually correct then you've got to notice that a 3% swing is much larger than some 0.001% swing.

 

[fskimospy]

You love these one word answers don't you?

Even the cursory responses I've given you are more than you deserve considering the quality of your posts.

 

[thraashman]

The laws are aimed at fraud not suppressing votes. I can't argue that they might supress some votes but saying that the law is aimed at that is nothing more than a blatant lie. Sorry you got suckered.

I'm sure there are some Republicans who will say that they are trying to suppress democrat votes but do the drafters of the bills/laws say this is the reason for the law?

I'm not gonna tell you that you're lying. You know you're lying. We know you're lying. It's no secret you're lying. So I'll just let that be a 100% truth that we all know. While Republicans will claim that the laws are to stop voter fraud, that's not what they're aimed at. If the Republicans came out and told the truth, well then it would be them taking a complete 180 from their platform on everything else since dishonesty is at the heart of the GOP platform.

Now the estimates of voter fraud are that it occurs between 0.0002% and 0.00004% of the time. The estimates of disenfranchisement of these voter id laws is 10-11%. That means that at best these laws stop 1 fraudulent vote for every 50,000 voters they disenfranchise. These numbers are perfectly available to every Republican pushing these laws. They're also aware that the voters suppressed are overwhelmingly Democrat voters.

So they can say all they want that these laws are to stop fraud, but the TRUTH is that they're designed to suppress Democrat voters.


No insults or personal attacks.

Please don't cast judgement on your fellow forum colleagues as "you are lying", it needlessly minimizes their viewpoints and opinions (ad hominem personal attack).

If a post contains factually inaccurate statements then the "post is a lie", not the poster. There is a difference, one is a personal insult while the other is a debate regarding a position or platform.

Stay on-topic and debate the debate, don't debate the character of the opponent. This is a Politics subforum, not to be confused with actual politics...leave the personal insults to the politicians.

Administrator Idontcare

 

[HumblePie]

You should have been voting in TX elections.

You don't pay CO taxes but think you should vote in their elections?

JFC.

Fern

It's the law. Or has been for a long time in regards to military members at least. You can vote in the elections where you live at even if your declared residence is elsewhere. Something similar was suppose to apply to students.

 

[fskimospy]

It's the law. Or has been for a long time in regards to military members at least. You can vote in the elections where you live at even if your declared residence is elsewhere. Something similar was suppose to apply to students.

I've heard a similar claim before, it's pretty absurd. You pay rent in a place (contributing to property taxes), you pay sales tax, you actually are subject that that locale's laws, etc, but because you file for income taxes somewhere else in the country you should vote there.

Just doesn't make sense.

 

[xBiffx]

I'm not gonna tell you that you're lying. You know you're lying. We know you're lying. It's no secret you're lying.

So they can say all they want that these laws are to stop fraud, but the TRUTH is that they're designed to suppress Democrat voters.

Prove it. Facts, irrefutable ones. No estimates or opinions.

 

[rudder]

That the laws don't get presented as "Bill to Reduce Democratic Voters" doesn't mean that isn't the point. If you are going to (il?)legally prevent 100,000 people from voting to fight 10 cases of voter fraud, do you really think this is about voter fraud?

Tennessee now has a voter ID law in place. People have plenty of time before November to get a photo ID.. for FREE.

You mean to tell me the ones that roundup people to take to polling places on election day... cannot take the time in the next 5 months to take these same people to get an ID... you know the small number of people who never had a drivers license. Plus if you show up at a Driver service center that issues these ID's... you get sent to the front of the line.

The polling places even accept expired drivers licenses. And the biggest complaint in Tennessee was the elderly would be disenfranchised... but they can vote by absentee ballot without showing an ID.

I have yet to hear of more than a smattering of a few individuals who are experiencing issues in TN.

 

[blankslate]

Prove it.

While not proof this study has some interesting evidence in terms of the percentages of people who commit voter fraud versus the how voter ID laws affects the amounts of voters who would typically vote one way.

Here is the complete study.

http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/pdf/TruthAboutVoterFraud.pdf

here is some data concerning Wisconsin that is highlighted

http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/case_studies_by_state/wisconsin_2004.html#more

Here is what a republican said about voter ID laws.

Royal Masset, the former political director for the Republican Party of Texas, concisely tied all of these strands together in a 2007 Houston Chronicle article concerning a highly controversial battle over photo identification legislation in Texas. Masset connected the inflated furor over voter fraud to photo identification laws and their expected impact on legitimate voters:

Among Republicans it is an “article of religious faith that voter fraud is causing us to lose elections,” Masset said. He doesn’t agree with that, but does believe that requiring photo IDs could cause enough of a dropoff in legitimate Democratic voting to add 3 percent to the Republican vote.

You can find that on page 6 of the report.

It's not proof no, but it is interesting evidence in my opinion.

 

[xBiffx]

Prove it. Facts, irrefutable ones. No estimates or opinions.

It's not proof no, but it is interesting evidence in my opinion.

Good job. :thumbsup:

 

[Texashiker]

It's the law. Or has been for a long time in regards to military members at least. You can vote in the elections where you live at even if your declared residence is elsewhere. Something similar was suppose to apply to students.

So I can live in Texas, and go to school in Louisiana, vote in Louisiana, then drive to Texas and vote again?

McNeese university in Lake Charles is only about 35 miles from Texas.

Same thing goes for Lamar in Orange Texas, its only 1 - 2 miles from the state line.

 

[cybrsage]

From the first paragraph of the article linked above:

They should vote where their home of record is. Pretty simple, easy, and legal. The military deals with this all the time, it is nothing new.

Outrage not found.

 

[HumblePie]

So I can live in Texas, and go to school in Louisiana, vote in Louisiana, then drive to Texas and vote again?

McNeese university in Lake Charles is only about 35 miles from Texas.

Same thing goes for Lamar in Orange Texas, its only 1 - 2 miles from the state line.

No. Only certain statuses to a person allow this to happen. Military membership and students are two that I know of off the bat.

Basically, as a military member or an out of state student, it is recognized that the person living where they are may not become a permanent resident. They aren't considered transitory, because they are expected to stay living in that place for a few years at the least though. Still, you vote where you LIVE, but pay income taxes where your base of residence is declared. When your status changes though you are expected to either move back to your declared area of residence, or change your declaration to where you currently are.

Damn people, this has been the law for AGES.

 

[HumblePie]

Also as stated, this prevents absentee ballots as well with these voter ID laws. Meaning, that if you are away on vacation, or doing a job assignment overseas (as a contractor this could happen to me) I would not be able to vote as I could no longer do an absentee vote since I couldn't show my ID to anyone.

 

[Texashiker]

No. Only certain statuses to a person allow this to happen. Military membership and students are two that I know of off the bat.

Basically, as a military member or an out of state student, it is recognized that the person living where they are may not become a permanent resident. They aren't considered transitory, because they are expected to stay living in that place for a few years at the least though. .

You are saying that someone can live in Vinton or Starks Louisiana, go to Lamar in Orange, vote in the Texas presidential election, then drive back to Louisiana and vote again.

 

[JSt0rm]

So I can live in Texas, and go to school in Louisiana, vote in Louisiana, then drive to Texas and vote again?

McNeese university in Lake Charles is only about 35 miles from Texas.

Same thing goes for Lamar in Orange Texas, its only 1 - 2 miles from the state line.

How often do you think that happens?

 

[Texashiker]

How often do you think that happens?

I do not think it happens at all.

I hope that the majority of people are honest enough not to try and cheat the system.

 

[JSt0rm]

I do not think it happens at all.

I hope that the majority of people are honest enough not to try and cheat the system.

So then why have these laws that stop a large % from being able to vote if its not actually stopping any fraud?

 

[xBiffx]

I do not think it happens at all.

I hope that the majority of people are honest enough not to try and cheat the system.

There's that hope word again. Haven't we used that enough? I'm gonna pull another no no and quote Reagan "Trust, but verify." As far as absentee ballots go, we can verify you are who you say you are after receiving your ballot back.

 

[Texashiker]

So then why have these laws that stop a large % from being able to vote if its not actually stopping any fraud?

I see no issue with requiring people to prove citizenship before they can vote.

The problem with the Texas law that was struck down, is that Texas required the people to have some form of state issued ID.

But yet people are required to show ID at a bank, or cash a check, or use a credit card, and sometimes even go to the doctor. So why shouldn't people be required to show ID to vote?

My daughter had to show a birth certificate for my grandson to sign up for tee-ball.

But yet people are supposed to be able to walk up to a voting booth, give a name, and be allowed to vote.

 

[JSt0rm]

There's that hope word again. Haven't we used that enough? I'm gonna pull another no no and quote Reagan "Trust, but verify." As far as absentee ballots go, we can verify you are who you say you are after receiving your ballot back.

So you are willing to stop 10% from voting to block .00001% fraud?

 

[JSt0rm]

But yet people are required to show ID at a bank, or cash a check, or use a credit card, and sometimes even go to the doctor. So why shouldn't people be required to show ID to vote?

I'm pretty sure this has been explained to you 100 times by now.

 

[Texashiker]

I'm pretty sure this has been explained to you 100 times by now.

Its ok for a bank to ask for ID to prevent fraud, but its not ok for the state to ask for ID?

 

[Fern]

I've heard a similar claim before, it's pretty absurd. You pay rent in a place (contributing to property taxes), you pay sales tax, you actually are subject that that locale's laws, etc, but because you file for income taxes somewhere else in the country you should vote there.

Just doesn't make sense.

Riiiight.

I pay thousands in r/e tax to the city where my commercial building is, so I get to vote there? Nope.

The big department stores are just across the county border so I'm paying sales tax to that county. I get to vote there? Nope.

IMO, residence for voting purposes and residence for taxation purposes should be the same. If I'm contributing the govt revenue, I should have a say in how it's spent (i.e., voting). If not, then no. (Excepting of course those who pay nothing because of low income.)

Fern