• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Voter Fraud!

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,145
6,184
136
This did not answer the question. The other did not either. You both assume 100% of the people who register to vote actually vote. We all know this is a stupid assumption to make. Only 60% of the population voted.
So I guess all these fraudulent voters are really good at guessing who will or will not vote?

So, if a two person team comes in at closing time, with person 1 calling out a name of a non-voting person to person 2 (hey Bill Johnson - how are you? you almost missed voting too, eh?), how do you detect person 2 is not actually Bill Johnson.

I want you to tell me a way to ACTUALLY DETECT in person voting fraud...not some "cause everyone who is registered votes, so they will be caught" type of lie.
That's quite a scheme you have going there. Two person team in order to produce one fraudulent vote?
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
Nothing in life is free. Hours at a DMV that's only open during work hours is a high price to pay for the working poor.
Of course photo ID is close to being a requirement to legally work.

Although a driver's license alone is insufficient evidence to work. You need a DL a birth certificate.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
So I guess all these fraudulent voters are really good at guessing who will or will not vote?
Guess you did not read the entire quote before replying, eh?


That's quite a scheme you have going there. Two person team in order to produce one fraudulent vote?
Easy and simple. Something any democrat can do.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,145
6,184
136
Guess you did not read the entire quote before replying, eh?
No, your theory is so laughably implausible that we have to revert back to them just guessing right.




Easy and simple. Something any democrat can do.
Not easy and not simple and runs the risk of being caught committing a felony.
 

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
How do they register to vote?
You can register to vote in under 5 minutes at voter registration drive booths outside your grocery store, or on your college campus on the way to class, or any number of other ways that takes very little time of effort. Lots of high school civics classes register all of their students to vote who are 18 or older.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,907
1,056
126
Only if we assume that people who are unable to prove their eligibility to vote are all legal voters.
Actually the numbers I use I've compiled from multiple sources and linked multiple times in multiple threads. Sometimes I use secondary and when I can find them even tertiary sources. And they are the number of legal, registered voters that do not meet the voter id requirements in their respective states to the estimated rate of voter fraud. Note, the number is actually inflated because it does not distinguish between fraud that the voter id laws would actually prevent and fraud it would not prevent. So it's even more skewed. But the estimates range from 50k:1 to 250k:1, actual numbers are more likely closer to 500k:1 due to the aforementioned lack of distinguishment.

Even if voter fraud occurred at a rate 100 times greater than is estimated by studies (a statistical variance so high it's almost impossible), disenfranchisement would still occur at a rate of 2500:1. Even if 90% of the people that don't meet their states' requirements were able to get an ID on time (another near statistical impossibility), and the 100 times misestimate mentioned above were true (a statistical rate so low you're more likely to be struck by lightning once a week this year), then the rate would be 250:1.

Do you get it now? There is literally no way for you to know these numbers and still support voter id laws unless you're playing politics or are a domestic terrorist.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
You can register to vote in under 5 minutes at voter registration drive booths outside your grocery store, or on your college campus on the way to class, or any number of other ways that takes very little time of effort. Lots of high school civics classes register all of their students to vote who are 18 or older.
So people have to actually go do something...much like they would do to get a photo ID.

Why are you for voter suppression? Why do you want to disenfranchise the people who cannot easily get to a store, are not in college (not everyone is rich and can go) or in high school (why do you hate drop outs?).

The logic is the same. If getting a photo ID is disenfranchisement because you have to actually do something to get it, then voter registration is also disenfranchisement since you have to do something to get it.

You cannot support one and not the other without being a hypocrit.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Download form and mail paperwork?
Why do you hate the poor and the elderly and want to disenfranchise them? Many of them do not have the Internet at home, nor even a computer!

Why are you so pro-disenfranchisement? How many votes do you demand we suppress with this? We need to remove voter registration unless you can prove it is needed to stop fraudulant votes.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
No, your theory is so laughably implausible that we have to revert back to them just guessing right.
Ah yes, the "wow, that would work and I cannot argue against it, so I must pretend it is stupid" argument. You do that a lot.


Not easy and not simple and runs the risk of being caught committing a felony.
Since when did people who want to break the law start caring about the punishment for breaking the law? If your logic were to hold, murder would not exist. Since it does, we know that punishment for crime is not a real deterrent to crime.

Sorry to again show you wrong. Oh wait, I am not sorry for showing you wrong again.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,145
6,184
136
Ah yes, the "wow, that would work and I cannot argue against it, so I must pretend it is stupid" argument. You do that a lot.
Better than pretending a two person team to produce one extra vote qualifies as viable to the point of requiring further government intervention.

Since when did people who want to break the law start caring about the punishment for breaking the law? If your logic were to hold, murder would not exist. Since it does, we know that punishment for crime is not a real deterrent to crime.
Risk vs. reward, but you know this.

Sorry to again show you wrong. Oh wait, I am not sorry for showing you wrong again.
Nice try. While you pat yourself on the back, the rest of us laugh at you.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Better than pretending a two person team to produce one extra vote qualifies as 'a plan.'
Ah, so unless one person voting one time can produce multiple votes, it is not actually voter fraud...why are you so stupid?

Risk vs. reward, but you know this.
So no one ever killed anyone over an xbox...why are you so stupid?

Nice try. While you pat yourself on the back, the rest of us laugh at you.
You are confused (as opposed to your normal stupid state). That laughter is directed at you.


You never did explain this:

Why do you hate the poor and the elderly and want to disenfranchise them? Many of them do not have the Internet at home, nor even a computer!

Why are you so pro-disenfranchisement? How many votes do you demand we suppress with this? We need to remove voter registration unless you can prove it is needed to stop fraudulant votes.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
Why do you hate the poor and the elderly and want to disenfranchise them? Many of them do not have the Internet at home, nor even a computer!

Why are you so pro-disenfranchisement? How many votes do you demand we suppress with this? We need to remove voter registration unless you can prove it is needed to stop fraudulant votes.
Plus they will have to go to a post office or other place that sells stamps so they can mail the paperwork back.

And wouldnt the cost of mailing the letter be considered a poll tax? You do realize those are unconstitutional right?
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,145
6,184
136
So people have to actually go do something...much like they would do to get a photo ID.

Why are you for voter suppression? Why do you want to disenfranchise the people who cannot easily get to a store, are not in college (not everyone is rich and can go) or in high school (why do you hate drop outs?).

The logic is the same. If getting a photo ID is disenfranchisement because you have to actually do something to get it, then voter registration is also disenfranchisement since you have to do something to get it.

You cannot support one and not the other without being a hypocrit.
So you think the government should be able to force you to obtain ID in order to vote.

Why are you for government mandates? Why do you support the nanny state (why do you hate freedom?).

The logic is the same. If mandating a photo ID is perfectly fine, then mandating that people buy health insurance must be, too.

You cannot support one and not the other without being a hypocrite.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
So you think the government should be able to force you to obtain ID in order to vote.
Do you think the government should be able to force you to register in order to vote.

Why are you for government mandates? Why do you support the nanny state (why do you hate freedom?).
Why are you for government mandates? Why do you support the nanny state (why do you hate freedom?).


Had to stop there because you got more stupid than normal. Voting is not healthcare. Registering to vote and getting an id to vote are both legal requirements placed upon people in order to vote.

Are you really so stupid you cannot understand the difference? Seriously, are you that stupid?
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,145
6,184
136
Ah, so unless one person voting one time can produce multiple votes, it is not actually voter fraud...why are you so stupid?
Never claimed that, but you also know this.



So no one ever killed anyone over an xbox...why are you so stupid?
You seem to be arguing that laws are useless. Is this what you believe?



You are confused (as opposed to your normal stupid state). That laughter is directed at you.


You never did explain this:

Why do you hate the poor and the elderly and want to disenfranchise them? Many of them do not have the Internet at home, nor even a computer!

Why are you so pro-disenfranchisement? How many votes do you demand we suppress with this? We need to remove voter registration unless you can prove it is needed to stop fraudulant votes.
Because there are other ways to register that were explained to you already.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Plus they will have to go to a post office or other place that sells stamps so they can mail the paperwork back.

And wouldnt the cost of mailing the letter be considered a poll tax? You do realize those are unconstitutional right?
True to all!

Anyone who supports voter registration supports a poll tax and hates the poor, the elderly, and minorities!!!!
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Never claimed that, but you also know this.
You clearly implied it. You said voting fraudlantly one time, when planned out by two people, is not a plan to vote fraudulantly. What logic did you use to create that statement?


You seem to be arguing that laws are useless. Is this what you believe?
Criminal laws do not, never have, and are not designed to prevent people from breaking the law. They are designed to punish those who do. It is hoped that people will not want to be punished and therefor follow the law. Obviously (even to an idiot such as yourself), people break laws regardless of the punishment involved.

So are laws useless? Depends on what use you subscribe to them. Laws are useless in cleaning my cat litter pan...but they are quite useful in incarcerating a murderer.


Because there are other ways to register that were explained to you already.
None that do not disenfranchise someone. Show me a way to register which does not disenfranchise anyone.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,145
6,184
136
Do you think the government should be able to force you to register in order to vote.
The minimal requirement of registering has been sufficient. I see no rational reason to tighten the requirements for voting.



Why are you for government mandates? Why do you support the nanny state (why do you hate freedom?).


Had to stop there because you got more stupid than normal.
More like you had to stop there because your troll brain couldn't come up with one of your usual delusional arguments, let alone one that holds any water.

Voting is not healthcare. Registering to vote and getting an id to vote are both legal requirements placed upon people in order to vote.
The bolded is not a legal requirement except when enough retards live in a community to elect officials to enact such a stupid law in the first place. The non-retarded people would vote out such hacks before such an abomination could be enacted.

Are you really so stupid you cannot understand the difference? Seriously, are you that stupid?
Intelligence may seem stupid to someone such as yourself.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,145
6,184
136
You clearly implied it. You said voting fraudlantly one time, when planned out by two people, is not a plan to vote fraudulantly. What logic did you use to create that statement?
I put 'a plan' in quotes because it is such a stupid idea that it barely qualifies as a plan, not because I wanted to imply that it wasn't a plan to vote fraudulently. This is apparent to anyone with any comprehension ability at all. I forgot you don't have any, so I edited the original statement to dumb it down just for you.




Criminal laws do not, never have, and are not designed to prevent people from breaking the law. They are designed to punish those who do. It is hoped that people will not want to be punished and therefor follow the law. Obviously (even to an idiot such as yourself), people break laws regardless of the punishment involved.

So are laws useless? Depends on what use you subscribe to them. Laws are useless in cleaning my cat litter pan...but they are quite useful in incarcerating a murderer.




None that do not disenfranchise someone. Show me a way to register which does not disenfranchise anyone.
Each option may disenfranchise some but when you take all the options available, very few are disenfranchised, if any. Forcing someone to obtain ID does not have enough options to prevent disenfranchisement. You also know this.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
16,886
6,473
136
The "info" you provided was simply wild conspiracy claims about the Kock brothers.
Wild conspiracy claims? Wtf are you talking about? This was an actual goal of Walker's, and only became unrealized due to people realizing 'holy crap, he's actually trying to do this!' - so he backed off.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OKSP800.htm

"Gov. Scott Walker's administration is working on finalizing a plan to close as many as 10 offices where people can obtain driver's licenses in order to expand hours elsewhere and come into compliance with new requirements that voters show photo IDs at the polls.

One Democratic lawmaker said Friday it appeared the decisions were based on politics, with the department targeting offices for closure in Democratic areas and expanding hours for those in Republican districts."


Yes, clearly the product of the Aliens guy on History channel. Grassy knoll shit for sure.



And you are calling me intellectually dishonest? Haha.
Yeah that's usually the term used to describe someone being intentionally obtuse. 'Intellectually lazy' might have been a better term to describe your failure to comprehend the basic info provided.


Honestly the discourse in P&N has really been downhill lately. The liberals are just totally losing their grip on reality due to Obama's failure freefall.
lol, the guy who responded with "are you fucking retarded?!" bemoaning the downgrade in forum civility. Wow. Thanks for that, needed a good laugh.
Repubs are railing against a threat to their political wellbeing, attacking an imaginary source despite facts, evidence, logic and common sense, but it's those silly libs that are losing their grip on reality!

To a moderate like me, the silliness of the Dems is profoundly outgunned by the crazy of the Repubs, and your input only reinforces that. Continue on with the self-righteous denial, I'm sure we could use a dozen more threads about this where you guys repeatedly show you don't get it, don't care, or both.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,486
13,493
136
The 15th, 19th, and 24th amendments make it clear you cannot abridge the right to vote based on race, gender, or age(>18). The fact that we have repeatedly had to pass amendments to guarantee the right to vote to certain people makes it pretty clear that the "right" to vote is abridgeable.

No where is the right to vote without proving your identity guaranteed.
Despite your efforts & those of other "Conservatives", the right to vote has become less & less subject to the tyranny of the majority.

This whole Voter Fraud routine is no different- it's just a foil, a beard, an excuse to restrict the electorate better to your liking.

The State of Pennsylvania will not argue voter fraud in court, attempting to justify their current wishes, because it basically doesn't exist at a significant level. So how can you, other than in pursuit of a different agenda entirely- voter suppression?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY