Yet another Democrat gets busted for illegal voting.

[First]

lol troll

 

[jhbball]

lol bump lol

 

[monovillage]

Do you have anything to offer other than "old coot"?

Get real, he was commenting on the post while admitting he hadn't even read the linked article and had no clue what the story concerned.

 

[WackyDan]

Yet another? How many does that make now, like 50, 60 million? I mean, it must be literally every single Democrat in America right? Or is it every single Democrat... in the WORLD? Hell, I saw something that said Barack Obama got more votes than there are people on Earth. Why is no one investigating this? Sure, I didn't actually see that said before I just typed it, but now that it's out there, I think it bears looking into.

Seriously, no one, and I mean literally no one, Democrat, Republican or otherwise, is defending the actions of this deluded lunatic. Similarly, no one is saying that voter fraud literally never happens. What HAS been said is that it happens infrequently enough that the proposals that call for mandatory ID don't make sense as a way to combat it. You acting like an intellectually dishonest partisan hack jackass makes your cause look weaker, not stronger, and you're dialing the trolling up to 11 from the get-go with this thread. You aren't looking for discussion, you're looking for a circle jerk, an opportunity to lament how those awful Democrats are everything you ever said they were because you found a single incident of one idiot who voted for her comatose sister. Congratulations, you win, you've convinced all the Democrats to start casting their fraudulent ballots for Republicans in future elections.

Troll on, son, troll on.

The problem here isn't the presidential elections but local candidates. Those party line votes these people make in the name of the dead or their relatives that don't vote can indeed cause a winner to be a loser in a local election where the race is that close, and many times, they are indeed that close.

Voter fraud at any level should be squashed and dealt with harshly.

 

[monovillage]

That's because voter fraud is vastly more likely to be by absentee ballot and absentee fraud (like all voter fraud) is vastly more often committed by Republicans. Of course they don't want to address ACTUAL voter fraud, they want to drum up an excuse to disenfranchise legal voters who are more likely to vote Democrat. No one believes anything different than this because it's the obvious truth. Some may claim they believe different, and some people also claim that the Saints shouldn't have been punished for the bounty scandal. They're called home team fans that will support any horrible thing their team does so long as it helps them win.

Why would you think that i'm not supporting added security for absentee voting, such as pre-registration in person every year for an absentee ballot. No registration by mail which would have stopped this particular case of voting fraud.

 

[zsdersw]

Get real, he was commenting on the post while admitting he hadn't even read the linked article and had no clue what the story concerned.

Yeah, because that's a good reason to say "fuck you" and "asshole" all the time when no such vitriol preceded it.

Just admit it.. you're an old coot (or curmudgeon, if you prefer).

 

[monovillage]

Yeah, because that's a good reason to say "fuck you" and "asshole" all the time when no such vitriol preceded it.

Just admit it.. you're an old coot (or curmudgeon, if you prefer).

I'm happy to admit it, the only alternative to getting old is getting dead.

 

[zsdersw]

I'm happy to admit it, the only alternative to getting old is getting dead.

Yeah, I already dismissed you as such a long time ago anyway.

 

[werepossum]

The problem here isn't the presidential elections but local candidates. Those party line votes these people make in the name of the dead or their relatives that don't vote can indeed cause a winner to be a loser in a local election where the race is that close, and many times, they are indeed that close.

Voter fraud at any level should be squashed and dealt with harshly.

Well said.

Why would you think that i'm not supporting added security for absentee voting, such as pre-registration in person every year for an absentee ballot. No registration by mail which would have stopped this particular case of voting fraud.

I'm all for requiring photo ID and abolishing all types of mail-in registration and voting except for the military. Today it's such a joke, foreigners getting driver's licenses are regularly registered to vote. That is not by accident.

 

[shira]

Nothing new, just posting this because some of our usual Democrat suspects deny it ever happens. Now they can change their tune to "it doesn't really matter, cuz it doesn't happen often enough........"

It's a good thing that another Democrat was caught and will hopefully go to prison over this issue.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/...entenced-prison-illegal-voting?nclick_check=1

You're a moron. The voter ID laws proposed by Republicans would do nothing to prevent the type of fraud perpetrated by this woman.

Everyone knows what the effect of voter ID laws are: A handful of fraudulent registrations will be prevented. => + 10 for Voter ID laws. But hundreds of thousands of people will be discouraged from registering.=> -600,000 for voter ID laws. So the net effect is that elections in states with voter ID laws will be LESS representative of the will of the people, since fewer people will vote.

 

[ivwshane]

Well said.


I'm all for requiring photo ID and abolishing all types of mail-in registration and voting except for the military. Today it's such a joke, foreigners getting driver's licenses are regularly registered to vote. That is not by accident.

I'm all for a voter ID requirement as well, provided the ID's are free and so are whatever documents are required to obtain it. And for those people for whome transportation or distance might be an issue a reimbursement of travel costs should be provided.

 

[Bowfinger]

I'm all for requiring photo ID and abolishing all types of mail-in registration and voting except for the military. Today it's such a joke, foreigners getting driver's licenses are regularly registered to vote. That is not by accident.

Great, so how about we start with the absentee ballots, since that's where the overwhelming majority of the individual vote fraud occurs? Once we have that under control, we can start working on other, lesser sources of fraud. Eventually, we can work down to the bottom of the list, where we'll find the in-person fraud that can be prevented by photo IDs. Then all we need to do is figure out a way to address that without disenfranchising 100,00-fold more legitimate voters in the process.

Of course, this is the order of priority for those sincerely interested in ensuring honest, fair elections. If one is instead looking to suppress certain unfriendly demographics, the GOP's backwards priorities makes perfect sense.

 

[werepossum]

I'm all for a voter ID requirement as well, provided the ID's are free and so are whatever documents are required to obtain it. And for those people for whome transportation or distance might be an issue a reimbursement of travel costs should be provided.

Agreed on the first part, not the second. If one is going to vote, one should be able to handle finding transportation like any other adult without starting yet another welfare program.

Great, so how about we start with the absentee ballots, since that's where the overwhelming majority of the individual vote fraud occurs? Once we have that under control, we can start working on other, lesser sources of fraud. Eventually, we can work down to the bottom of the list, where we'll find the in-person fraud that can be prevented by photo IDs. Then all we need to do is figure out a way to address that without disenfranchising 100,00-fold more legitimate voters in the process.

Of course, this is the order of priority for those sincerely interested in ensuring honest, fair elections. If one is instead looking to suppress certain unfriendly demographics, the GOP's backwards priorities makes perfect sense.

How do we know this isn't an even bigger source of voting fraud when there is virtually no way to catch anyone who merely registers on election day with a fake name and address? In Milwaukee for instance 17% of the voters in the last election were same-day registrations, bringing turnout to a whopping 87%. Wonder how many of the follow-up packets were returned "No such person.no such address". Remember, this woman is a thirty year poll worker; given that she was voting at least three times per election, how stringent can we assume she would be in evaluating potential Democrat voters?

Madison had 96% turnout, figured down from its initially reported 119%. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/06/05/1097599/-Breaking-Madison-Turnout-Over-100#

Fulton County (Atlanta, GA) had four precincts with over 100% turnout, including one with 3300% turnout. Statewide turnout averaged 10% - 20%, by the way. http://www.wsbradio.com/news/news/voter-turnout-over-100-some-fulton-co-precincts/nQDFH/

Hell, Philly has districts that routinely exceed 100% turnout even without same-day registration. Like many places, 100%+ turnout isn't even news anymore. Hinsdale County CO has 110% of its adult population in registered voters, with 92% turnout in 2010. For the math-challenged, that means more votes were cast in tiny Hinsdale County that the county has adults, without even compensating for those adults mentally, physically or legally barred from voting. And Hinsdale is merely one of ten Colorado counties with more registered voters than adults.

And yet proggies keep singing the same old two-line hymn.
"There is no voter fraud."
"Nothing which would allow us to know if there is voter fraud can ever be allowed."

 

[JEDIYoda]

Then try reading the article asshole.

obviously comprehension is not your strong point....

 

[JEDIYoda]

How do we know this isn't an even bigger source of voting fraud when there is virtually no way to catch anyone who merely registers on election day with a fake name and address? In Milwaukee for instance 17% of the voters in the last election were same-day registrations, bringing turnout to a whopping 87%. Wonder how many of the follow-up packets were returned "No such person.no such address". Remember, this woman is a thirty year poll worker; given that she was voting at least three times per election, how stringent can we assume she would be in evaluating potential Democrat voters?

Madison had 96% turnout, figured down from its initially reported 119%. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...nout-Over-100#

Fulton County (Atlanta, GA) had four precincts with over 100% turnout, including one with 3300% turnout. Statewide turnout averaged 10% - 20%, by the way. http://www.wsbradio.com/news/news/vo...ecincts/nQDFH/

Hell, Philly has districts that routinely exceed 100% turnout even without same-day registration. Like many places, 100%+ turnout isn't even news anymore. Hinsdale County CO has 110% of its adult population in registered voters, with 92% turnout in 2010. For the math-challenged, that means more votes were cast in tiny Hinsdale County that the county has adults, without even compensating for those adults mentally, physically or legally barred from voting. And Hinsdale is merely one of ten Colorado counties with more registered voters than adults.

And yet proggies keep singing the same old two-line hymn.
"There is no voter fraud."
"Nothing which would allow us to know if there is voter fraud can ever be allowed."

you should change your name to wereidiot.....or werevillageidiot.......again nobody said that there was no voter fraud......it`s just that there is not enough voter fraud happening to support a voter ID.....

 

[WackyDan]

you should change your name to wereidiot.....or werevillageidiot.......again nobody said that there was no voter fraud......it`s just that there is not enough voter fraud happening to support a voter ID.....

That is the lame excuse we get from the libs and progs on this... "Ok, it does happen, but not enough to worry about".

Please... Run for local office and tell me how you would feel knowing the race came down to a separation of just a few votes.. And you lost.

Yet he posted articles that showed obvious large scale issues in select voting districts. You can't explain that can you?

 

[fskimospy]

That is the lame excuse we get from the libs and progs on this... "Ok, it does happen, but not enough to worry about".

Please... Run for local office and tell me how you would feel knowing the race came down to a separation of just a few votes.. And you lost.

Yet he posted articles that showed obvious large scale issues in select voting districts. You can't explain that can you?

Do you realize just how many basic facts he got wrong in that post?

I consulted the Wisconsin GAO and found a spreadsheet of ballots counted vs. registered voters and came up with a total turnout of 83% for Madison.
http://gab.wi.gov/publications/statistics/gab-190/November-2012

He claimed voter turnout in Georgia was 10-20%. In reality? 72%
http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/GA/42277/113204/en/summary.html

Hinsdale County, CO has 665 registered voters as of 2012:
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Results/Abstract/2012/general/turnout.html

According to Wiki they have a population of 810 and an over 18 population of about 641. More registered voters than residents? Not if you understand how to use math.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinsdale_County,_Colorado

Need I go on? EDIT: I mean his basic argument is "look how much voter fraud there is due to these statistics that I just made up".

 

[werepossum]

Do you realize just how many basic facts he got wrong in that post?

I consulted the Wisconsin GAO and found a spreadsheet of ballots counted vs. registered voters and came up with a total turnout of 83% for Madison.
http://gab.wi.gov/publications/statistics/gab-190/November-2012

He claimed voter turnout in Georgia was 10-20%. In reality? 72%
http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/GA/42277/113204/en/summary.html

Hinsdale County, CO has 665 registered voters as of 2012:
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Results/Abstract/2012/general/turnout.html

According to Wiki they have a population of 810 and an over 18 population of about 641. More registered voters than residents? Not if you understand how to use math.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinsdale_County,_Colorado

Need I go on? EDIT: I mean his basic argument is "look how much voter fraud there is due to these statistics that I just made up".

I know reading things that upset you is difficult, but it cannot be THAT difficult.

My first link is from June 5, 2012. Sorry that I did not specifically tell you that this was not from the November 2012 election which at that time had not happened. Sometimes I forget just how much help you need . . .

My second link is from August 8, 2012. Do I really need to explain that some jurisdictions have more than one election in their history? Does the concept that articles of fact generally apply to things that have already happened versus things that have not yet happened need more explanation?

I did not link the Hinsdale County story, but it's from 2010. http://mediatrackers.org/colorado/2012/09/04/colorado-counties-have-more-voters-than-people
I know the article is from September 2012, but it clearly identifies the election studied as the 2010 election cycle, not the election which had not yet happened when the article was written. Trust me on this. Without your benefit of automatically knowing which party is in the right before an event happens, this was the best they could do.

Stupid or intentionally dishonest, Eskimospy, your choice.

As a public service to those with progressive "thought processes", I offer the following caveat:
When I link a story stating voter turnout or other such facts, it very seldom applies to elections that have not yet happened when the article was written.

 

[werepossum]

Just to link the Media Trackers story with a partial quote:
http://mediatrackers.org/colorado/2012/09/04/colorado-counties-have-more-voters-than-people

A review of voter registration data for ten counties in Colorado details a pattern of voter bloat inflating registration rolls to numbers larger than the total voting age population. Using publicly available voter data and comparing it to U.S. Census records reveals the ten counties having a total registration ranging between 104 to 140 percent of the respective populations.

Counties such as Gilpin and Hinsdale have 110 percent of their populations registered to vote. Gilpin County has a total population of 5,441 with 17.4% of the population below the voting age, making the highest possible number of registered voters 4,494. Currently Gilpin County has 4909 registered voters. Hinsdale County has a total population of 830 with 20% of the population below the voting age, making the highest possible number of registered voters 664. At 110 percent registration, that means that there are 515 excess voter registrations in Gilpin county and 68 excess registrations for Hinsdale.

When Media Trackers requested comment on the voter bloat in Gilpin county, Chief Deputy Gail Maxwell explained that “This is just a reminder Gilpin is a Gaming Community. The voters come and go!”
While these voters come and go, they manage to turnout to vote. Records show Gilpin County had 61 percent voter turnout in the 2010 election and Hinsdale County had an astounding 92 percent voter turnout. This is far above the Colorado average turnout of 48 percent, and the national average of 41 percent.

All ten counties investigated by Media Trackers reported voter turnout greater than the national average. Nine out of ten also showed voter turnout well above the Colorado average. Mineral and San Juan counties, which have voter registration numbers of 126 percent and 112 percent respectively, had voter turnout of 96 and 83 percent respectively.

Jackson, Summit, Cheyenne, and Elbert counties have 111, 107, 105, and 104 percent of their population registered to vote, while managing 71, 44, 71, and 63 percent voter turnout.

Rounding out the ten counties looked at by Media Trackers are San Miguel county, which topped the list at 140 percent of the population being registered to vote and 52 percent voter turnout, and Ouray county, which had 119 percent of the population registered to vote and a whopping 74 percent voter turnout.

To Eskimospy and JEDIYoda, this represents a healthy democracy. As long as the correct results are obtained, of course.

 

[fskimospy]

I know reading things that upset you is difficult, but it cannot be THAT difficult.

My first link is from June 5, 2012. Sorry that I did not specifically tell you that this was not from the November 2012 election which at that time had not happened. Sometimes I forget just how much help you need . . .

Speaking of help, thanks! I just re-ran the numbers for the June 5th election as compared to registrants on July 1 (which was the closest one to the actual number of registrations on that day) and voter turnout was even lower! I want to thank you for helping me show that your point was even more wrong and more delusional than previously thought. I encourage you to go run the numbers yourself.

I did not link the Hinsdale County story, but it's from 2010. http://mediatrackers.org/colorado/2012/09/04/colorado-counties-have-more-voters-than-people
I know the article is from September 2012, but it clearly identifies the election studied as the 2010 election cycle, not the election which had not yet happened when the article was written. Trust me on this. Without your benefit of automatically knowing which party is in the right before an event happens, this was the best they could do.

Stupid or intentionally dishonest, Eskimospy, your choice.

As a public service to those with progressive "thought processes", I offer the following caveat:
When I link a story stating voter turnout or other such facts, it very seldom applies to elections that have not yet happened when the article was written.[/QUOTE]

I admit I did think you were talking about current elections, not that you were desperately searching for any and all discrepancies nationwide in all elections that happened over a multi-year period.

 

[Jhhnn]

Just to link the Media Trackers story with a partial quote:
http://mediatrackers.org/colorado/2012/09/04/colorado-counties-have-more-voters-than-people


To Eskimospy and JEDIYoda, this represents a healthy democracy. As long as the correct results are obtained, of course.

Magnificent bit of desperation. Really. All the counties that were "studied" have large numbers of seasonal homes & residences. Colorado is a bit lax in terms of defining primary vs secondary residence, as well.

While the Census counts only full year residents to determine population, that doesn't account for people who spend half the year in Gilpin county, for example, and the other half in Denver. Or retired people who travel freely between two homes. They'll generally assign permanent residency to Denver, while Colorado doesn't necessarily do that at all. For voting purposes, it's a states' rights issue. Colorado can determine residency in such a fashion if they choose, and they do.

So for every "extra" vote in those counties, there's a "missing" vote somewhere else in the state.

Outrage not found, other than in the imaginations of True Believers.

 

[werepossum]

Magnificent bit of desperation. Really. All the counties that were "studied" have large numbers of seasonal homes & residences. Colorado is a bit lax in terms of defining primary vs secondary residence, as well.

While the Census counts only full year residents to determine population, that doesn't account for people who spend half the year in Gilpin county, for example, and the other half in Denver. Or retired people who travel freely between two homes. They'll generally assign permanent residency to Denver, while Colorado doesn't necessarily do that at all. For voting purposes, it's a states' rights issue. Colorado can determine residency in such a fashion if they choose, and they do.

So for every "extra" vote in those counties, there's a "missing" vote somewhere else in the state.

Outrage not found, other than in the imaginations of True Believers.

Oh, obviously they registered in both places, but they only voted in one. Or maybe they just always happen to be in their seasonal home during elections. 'Cause we know vote fraud never happens. And since vote fraud never happens, we know it's okay for people to register in both places and we don't even have to investigate it.

And the best part is, we know all this without any evidence. All we have to do is realize that Voter ID is bad for Democrats, then we work backward and the first marginally plausible excuse becomes reality.

 

[ivwshane]

Oh, obviously they registered in both places, but they only voted in one. Or maybe they just always happen to be in their seasonal home during elections. 'Cause we know vote fraud never happens. And since vote fraud never happens, we know it's okay for people to register in both places and we don't even have to investigate it.

And the best part is, we know all this without any evidence. All we have to do is realize that Voter ID is bad for Democrats, then we work backward and the first marginally plausible excuse becomes reality.

So your issue is with voter registration? I don't understand your point or how voter ID laws would fix the issue.

 

[OGOC]

What's awesome is that this lady was engaging in absentee ballot fraud, something that voted ID laws do nothing to prevent but that Republicans refuse to attempt to address.

You're a moron. The voter ID laws proposed by Republicans would do nothing to prevent the type of fraud perpetrated by this woman.

Would the Voter ID laws Democrats in Rhode Island passed prevent this kind of voter fraud?

 

[sci guy]

Wow, is the PN forum full of haters?