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

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Everyone knows the best way to prove a law is needed is to provide examples that the law would not actually prevent. :D
Apparently, since they are the only (semi-material) examples the suppression apologists have offered in any of the many threads about these RNC voter suppression laws. One would think by now if there were any actual on-topic examples supporting their cause, Fox would have provided them.
 

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,017
1
76
So...stating facts is intellectually dishonest, but deflecting the argument with personal attacks and logical fallacies is? K.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
So...stating facts is intellectually dishonest, but deflecting the argument with personal attacks and logical fallacies is? K.
Lying is not OK, and that's what you are now doing. Your link simply, factually, and objectively failed to provide evidence of voter fraud that would have been prevented with photo IDs. It simply didn't. You repeating the same lie over and over doesn't magically make it true. And if you're going to cry about "personal attacks and logical fallacies", you'd best start with a mirror.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
So...stating facts is intellectually dishonest, but deflecting the argument with personal attacks and logical fallacies is? K.
Your link showed voter fraud that probably changed the outcome of a U.S. Senatorial election, but it wasn't the right kind of voter fraud.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Your link showed voter fraud that probably changed the outcome of a U.S. Senatorial election, but it wasn't the right kind of voter fraud.
Yes, or somewhat more precisely, it wasn't the kind of voter fraud addressed by the controversial voter photo ID laws. I don't think anyone denies that election fraud is a problem. It's just that most of the fraud happens in the counting, not the casting. Further, effectively no material vote fraud occurs through in-person impersonation of another voter, the fraud targeted by photo ID laws. That is the bone of contention, and QuantumPion's story completely failed to show any evidence of it. Instead, it shown registered voters voting as themselves. They just weren't eligible voters in Minnesota due to their felony convictions. A photo ID law wouldn't have changed that in any way.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
Intellectual dishonesty is so unbecoming of you. While your 'a' may or may not be true (not addressed in your link, but perhaps elsewhere), your 'b' is an outright lie. You did not show an example of voting fraud that would be prevented by photo IDs. Perhaps there were just too many words for you to digest, but the voters in your link were registered, they were not impersonating others, and therefore a photo ID would have made exactly a) Jack and b) Shit difference. Try again.
If we had to prove every law we passed would have the desired outcome we home to achive, we wouldn't get much passed.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Yes, or somewhat more precisely, it wasn't the kind of voter fraud addressed by the controversial voter photo ID laws. I don't think anyone denies that election fraud is a problem. It's just that most of the fraud happens in the counting, not the casting. Further, effectively no material vote fraud occurs through in-person impersonation of another voter, the fraud targeted by photo ID laws. That is the bone of contention, and QuantumPion's story completely failed to show any evidence of it. Instead, it shown registered voters voting as themselves. They just weren't eligible voters in Minnesota due to their felony convictions. A photo ID law wouldn't have changed that in any way.
Then we obviously need even more laws to ensure that our voting is fair and balanced and legal. More restrictions on absentee ballots and possibly background checks and waiting periods.

Of course we could have every felons drivers license marked "ex-FELON" to prevent it from happening again.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY