• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Should ex-cons be allowed to vote, Holder thinks so

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
IGBT said:
doesn't matter. voter fraud is thru the roof in the US. You need picture ID to vote in a union election but no ID necessary to vote in public service elections. Fix the ID / voter fraud problem first.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's so thru[sic] the roof that with tons of republicans trying their hardest to find evidence of it they cannot find more than a few small incidents nationwide in the last decade plus.
 
IGBT said:
doesn't matter. voter fraud is thru the roof in the US. You need picture ID to vote in a union election but no ID necessary to vote in public service elections. Fix the ID / voter fraud problem first.
Click to expand...

lolololol. Do you have a mental illness?
 
Gotta agree with those saying that everyone should be allowed to vote. As far as I'm concerned, they should even be allowed to vote while they're in prison. They're still citizens, and subject to our laws, are they not?
 
thraashman said:
Yeah it's so thru[sic] the roof that with tons of republicans trying their hardest to find evidence of it they cannot find more than a few small incidents nationwide in the last decade plus.
Click to expand...

Who'd a thunk it. If you dont check IDs when people vote, its hard to tell when fraud happens. Crazy shit.
 
BUnit1701 said:
Who'd a thunk it. If you dont check IDs when people vote, its hard to tell when fraud happens. Crazy shit.
Click to expand...

Hard to tell? Why then would you believe that it is happening?

Perhaps it's just rationalization for feelings of being cheated, some how, some way. Otherwise, you'd be able to demonstrate cheating.

You can't, of course, but you can believe.
 
Jhhnn said:
Hard to tell? Why then would you believe that it is happening?

Perhaps it's just rationalization for feelings of being cheated, some how, some way. Otherwise, you'd be able to demonstrate cheating.

You can't, of course, but you can believe.
Click to expand...

Pretty simple, I understand human nature, and know full well any opportunity to break rules will be taken. Requiring an ID to vote isn't foolproof, but it would make it far more difficult to perform voter fraud than it is now.

But I'll play along, please enlighten us how simple it is now to identify voter fraud. I'll sleep much easier once you assure me how it cant be happening now.
 
We're talking 11 states.

Three states -- Florida, Iowa, and Kentucky -- permanently disenfranchise convicted felons, unless the government approves an individual request to have rights restored. Eight others -- Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, Mississippi, Nevada, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming -- bar at least some, though not all, convicted felons from voting.

And if I follow the arguments here, some feel felons shouldn't get to vote at all.....so how do the 8 states mentioned above even make the case that some convicted felons get to vote and others never get their vote restored with a straight face?

At least Florida, Iowa, and Kentucky are consistent, if misguided.
 
Meghan54 said:
We're talking 11 states.

Three states -- Florida, Iowa, and Kentucky -- permanently disenfranchise convicted felons, unless the government approves an individual request to have rights restored. Eight others -- Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, Mississippi, Nevada, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming -- bar at least some, though not all, convicted felons from voting.

And if I follow the arguments here, some feel felons shouldn't get to vote at all.....so how do the 8 states mentioned above even make the case that some convicted felons get to vote and others never get their vote restored with a straight face?

At least Florida, Iowa, and Kentucky are consistent, if misguided.
Click to expand...

My issue is the federal government getting involved. If they want to amend the constitution, give it a shot. Otherwise let the states handle their own business.
 
BUnit1701 said:
Requiring an ID to vote isn't foolproof, but it would make it far more difficult to perform voter fraud than it is now.

But I'll play along, please enlighten us how simple it is now to identify voter fraud. I'll sleep much easier once you assure me how it cant be happening now.
Click to expand...
If it's the kind of voter fraud ID would have any effect on it, it's incredibly easy to demonstrate. Someone goes to vote with my name who's not me, then I go to vote, they don't give me my ballot because it's been cast, and I complain. All such complaints go up the ladder (and probably to the media if I'm pissed off) and get investigated. That has basically never happened. For such a scheme to work, you would have to 1) know the name of every voter who was properly registered in the election BUT was 100% not going to vote on their own, 2) have a person who can pass for each and every absentee person (men for male names, etc.), 3) have these imposters go to the polling places in person, correctly remembering each of these names and associated addresses, and 4) not have anyone notice or say anything, ever.

In-person voter fraud is basically non-existent because it's a ridiculous way to commit fraud. If you want to cheat an election, you bribe a counter, or hack some software, or replace a ballot box, or send in 10k absentee ballots under registered voter name, or do something that will have an actual impact on the election on a serious scale. None of those will be touched by voter ID.
 
berzerker60 said:
If it's the kind of voter fraud ID would have any effect on it, it's incredibly easy to demonstrate. Someone goes to vote with my name who's not me, then I go to vote, they don't give me my ballot because it's been cast, and I complain. All such complaints go up the ladder (and probably to the media if I'm pissed off) and get investigated. That has basically never happened. For such a scheme to work, you would have to 1) know the name of every voter who was properly registered in the election BUT was 100% not going to vote on their own, 2) have a person who can pass for each and every absentee person (men for male names, etc.), 3) have these imposters go to the polling places in person, correctly remembering each of these names and associated addresses, and 4) not have anyone notice or say anything, ever.

In-person voter fraud is basically non-existent because it's a ridiculous way to commit fraud. If you want to cheat an election, you bribe a counter, or hack some software, or replace a ballot box, or send in 10k absentee ballots under registered voter name, or do something that will have an actual impact on the election on a serious scale. None of those will be touched by voter ID.
Click to expand...

But anything that would stop any of those voter frauds that might actually be occurring won't disenfranchise voters whom tend to vote democrat on a massive scale. So of course the people implementing voter id laws don't want to do them. Because no one actually believes voter fraud is really happening, but also no one is going to admit that they genuinely want to illegally disenfranchise legal voters. Because that would make them assholes! They are assholes, but no one wants to admit to being an asshole.
 
BUnit1701 said:
But I'll play along, please enlighten us how simple it is now to identify voter fraud. I'll sleep much easier once you assure me how it cant be happening now.
Click to expand...

It's your allegation, and therefore your burden of proof, simple or not.

Prove that significant voting fraud exists, and we can have a conversation based on something other than your delusions & aspersions.
 
BUnit1701 said:
Pretty simple, I understand human nature, and know full well any opportunity to break rules will be taken. Requiring an ID to vote isn't foolproof, but it would make it far more difficult to perform voter fraud than it is now.

But I'll play along, please enlighten us how simple it is now to identify voter fraud. I'll sleep much easier once you assure me how it cant be happening now.
Click to expand...

So someone is going to break rules to make a single different vote? Think about all the steps you have to go through to vote, now imagine someone doing that in a significant enough way to change an election and more importantly, not be really goddamn obvious about it.
 
I think they should too. I think it's unconscionable that the current law would deny them that right.
 
Jhhnn said:
It's your allegation, and therefore your burden of proof, simple or not.

Prove that significant voting fraud exists, and we can have a conversation based on something other than your delusions & aspersions.
Click to expand...

I think I found the guy that's committing voter fraud by in-person voter impersonation:

DrEvil.jpg

Just look at his views on killing off secret agents:
"I'm going to place him in an easily escapable situation involving an overly elaborate and exotic death."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top