patrick.net

Dan8267 says

Voter fraud non-existent....

You undermine your argument by starting with a false premise. Voter fraud does, in fact, exist. Documented cases have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

curious2 says

Voter fraud does, in fact, exist. Documented cases have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

OK, you got me. I should have said "virtually" nonexistence. Yeah, one in a million ballots is an intentional fraudulent ballot. That's not enough to even have the slightest impact. Miscounting causes greater error.

Compare that to gerrymandering which completely rigs elections. My point still stands. Anyone who is legitimately concerned with election integrity would be up in arms about gerrymandering, not in-person voter fraud.

Go ahead Dan & piss off the white male Republicans,but it's not a problem,they've got nothing.
WAIT!
Benghazi! emails! Clinton's murder opponents? Lousy Liberals pick on Don-Don!

PCGyver says

Colin Powell says....

Appeal to authority fallacy. Cases have been proved, in court, beyond a reasonable doubt. But if all you want is appeal to authority, ask Jimmy Carter. Colin Powell has never even been elected to anything, so he's not even an authority on this point.

curious2 says

Cases have been proved, in court, beyond a reasonable doubt.

From that article,

But ask voters in Troy, N.Y., Lincoln County, W.Va., and Florida whether voter fraud is a real problem.
Four local officials and party activists were convicted in 2011 of voter fraud in Troy for forging enough absentee ballots to "likely have tipped the city council and county elections" in 2009.

That's not voter fraud. That's election official fraud. It's not people showing up in person to cast votes. It's the election official who count the votes committing fraud. This would in no way be addressed by any kind of voter ID as the voters aren't committing this fraud.

Also from the article,

In March 2012, the county sheriff and clerk in Lincoln County, W.Va., pled guilty to voter fraud. They stuffed enough bogus absentee ballots into ballot boxes to change the outcome of a 2010 Democratic primary election. Was this a one-time incident? Probably not, since the Lincoln County auditor was also found guilty of voter fraud in 2005.

This is also not voter fraud but rather election official fraud Like the prior case, it involved absentee ballots, which isn't addressed by voter ID laws, and is committed by state officials, not voters. These two cases prove that the real fraud is done by state officials not voters or illegal voters.

Finally from the article,

An ongoing review of voter registration rolls in Florida has already found almost 100 confirmed non-citizens registered to vote, half of whom voted in at least one previous election; this in a state that decided the 2000 presidential election by slightly more than 500 votes.

Florida has a population of 20.27 million people. 50 people illegally voting is jack diddly shit. What's even worse is that in the election mentioned, it was the fraudulent miscounting of ballets, discarding thousands of votes for Gore, that really undermined the election and caused an incorrect vote. It was known at the time that the vote count was fraudulent, and even the Supreme Court -- well, 5 of the 9 justices -- didn't give a damn and chose to appoint their preference for president rather than who the voters actually voted for.

I think you've thoroughly proved my points.
1. In person voter fraud is utterly insignificant. It's even less than accidental miscounts.
2. Deliberate discounting of votes altered the 2000 election results.
3. In all other fraudulent elections, the fraud that undermined the election was committed by state officials, not voters, and certainly not in person voters.
4. Gerrymandering in contrast rigs about a hundred elections each year (averaged out) at the federal level alone. It is an overwhelming form of corruption.

curious2 says

The OP hasn't changed the thread title, even though he acknowledged it's false.

Fine, I'll put in the word virtually which I omitted, not out of deception, but simply because the mole hill is so damn tiny.

One woman out of 10 million actually used this product to massage her stomach like the ad shows. So clearly, the primary purpose of the device and it's primary use is as a stomach massager. Meanwhile, we should ignore what the other 9,999,999 women are doing with the device as that's a red herring.

It would be trivial to create a secure national ID without infringing upon a single voter's rights. However, every voter ID law has been surgically designed to disenfranchise Democratic voters, and particularly the poor.

Any voter ID system should have the following properties.
1. Free to all persons including the homeless and prisoners.
2. Actively delivered to as many Americans as possible long before the election.
3. Available on the spot at the election polling site.
4. The lack of voter ID cannot prevent a vote from being cast. Instead, an ID is created on the spot for the voter, and the vote flag for verification of the person's ID. The state must demonstrate that the person is not who he says he is or is not a citizen. Until then, the vote counts. In the Information Age, this should pose no problem. The police verify people's ID all the time when they arrest someone who has a warrant.
5. All U.S. citizens 18 and older get to vote. No exceptions. Voting is now a right, not a privilege.
6. Registration to vote is no longer necessary. You don't have to register to pay taxes, so there is no reason to register to vote. Being a U.S. citizen 18 or older automatically enrolls you as an independent voter.

I guarantee that the vast majority of people in favor of voting ID laws would strongly oppose the above system because it would cause a hell of a lot more poor people voting, and that's exactly what they are trying to prevent with voter ID laws.

By the way, we do need a national ID with the above properties and many more, but that's another topic. Maybe I'll write a thread on that.

I've been writing about the evils of single-seat (single-winner) voting districts for years. Glad to see that others are speaking up, too.

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2017/06/11/12-democrat-staffers-arrested-charged-voter-fraud-501442/

12 Democrat staffers arrested, charged with voter fraud

It's very hard to find voter fraud in certain states, like Washington, where they basically use the Honor System.

I believe Turk who shot up that mall illegally voted at least once, not being a US Citizen.

Virginia also does not demand proof of citizenship and works on an honor system, where thousands of those ineligible to vote appear on the voter rolls:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/1/noncitizens-lurking-on-virginia-voter-rolls/

And that's just a few counties. Naturally, Clinton Pal McAulliffe doesn't want an investigation.

zzyzzx says

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2017/06/11/12-democrat-staffers-arrested-charged-voter-fraud-501442/

12 Democrat staffers arrested, charged with voter fraud

Sounds like fake news.
1. Comes from a propaganda site with zero credibility.
2. No mention of the names of the persons arrested. This never, ever is the case unless the arrested are minors.
3. No mention of this story from any legitimate news agency. It appears only on right-wing conservative propaganda sites.
4. No mention of any details about the false registrations or anything else in the story.

Maybe it's true, but the burden of proof is on the accuser. You can't believe everything written on the Internet. There are no standards for truthfulness.

"Maybe that's what online fora end up being about, a 2D representation of partisan politics. People make obviously false assertions, then line up in factions; each side loves its own lies and hates the lies on the other side. The OP hasn't changed the thread title, even though he acknowledged it's false. I typed facts, yet someone Disliked my comment in which I disproved the OP headline. "Dislike facts that prove your side wrong! The Party and its Dear Leader must always be right! Prove your loyalty by lying for the Party!"

No, people disliked your comment because you are picking a nit and ignoring the point of the thread.

And the fact that it's a Fox News statistics means it's wrong. Fox just outright lies.

Also, "might have voted"? They don't even have the balls to say "did vote".

The word might makes the phrase that follows it meaningless. It's code for "this statement is true whether or not the conclusion is right because the statement is really A or NOT A and that's always true". So, it is a true statement that Donald Trump might have raped hundreds of babies while Republicans ravaged each other in a blood orgy.

It's reported elsewhere as well.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/19/noncitizen-illegal-vote-number-higher-than-estimat/
A research group in New Jersey has taken a fresh look at postelection polling data and concluded that the number of noncitizens voting illegally in U.S. elections is likely far greater than previous estimates.

As many as 5.7 million noncitizens may have voted in the 2008 election, which put Barack Obama in the White House.

Obligatory:

zzyzzx says

It's reported elsewhere as well.

Any reputable source, i.e. one that isn't a debunk propaganda site caught repeatedly reporting lies or a front for a right-wing propaganda organization?

Government research has shown that at least 3% of voters are illegal immigrants. It was an accidental discovery from studying jury records. Juries are selected from people who vote. 3% of people selected Jury duty are not US citizens and are disqualified. Obama won by 1% in 2008. It was the illegal immigrant vote that got him elected.

"Government research has shown that at least 3% of voters are illegal immigrants. It was an accidental discovery from studying jury records. Juries are selected from people who vote. 3% of people selected Jury duty are not US citizens and are disqualified. Obama won by 1% in 2008. It was the illegal immigrant vote that got him elected."

Please cite the study and link it.

And juries are selected from people who register to vote--not from actual voters.

zzyzzx says

Government research has shown that at least 3% of voters are illegal immigrants.

Citation? And don't bother with Wikipropagandapedia.

zzyzzx says

It was the illegal immigrant vote that got him elected.

If Republicans didn't violate the right to vote of tens of millions of American citizens by directly targeting minority voters with anti-drug laws whose sole creation purpose was to purge the voter registration of political opponents, then Obama would have won by 20%.

If your team has prevented tens of millions of American citizens from voting, then you don't get to bitch and moan about the imaginary voting of illegal immigrants. If every American citizen who wanted to vote could vote, then Republicans would never win a national election. If Republicans didn't gerrymander the elections, then they would lose over half their votes in Congress. The amount of election fraud perpetrated by the Republican Party is outlandish and down right treasonous. It undermines the republic.

Oh, and don't even get me started on the outright, deliberate disregard of votes in the 2000 election that completely discredited our republic. That election was decided by a few Republican Party members, not by the electoral vote or the will of the people. So everything you say about illegal immigrants voting would still be utter hypocrisy even if it were true.

zzyzzx says

Government research has shown....

Please do cite and link.

Dan8267 says

tens of millions

Bad math day, apparently.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/issues/felony-disenfranchisement/

joeyjojojunior says

And juries are selected from

multiple databases including voter registration and government ID (e.g. driver's license, non-driver ID). Some jurisdictions allow illegal aliens to get driver's licenses, and most if not all allow resident visa holders to get driver's licenses. It wouldn't surprise me to learn some people show up in response to a jury notice and say they aren't citizens, but that doesn't mean they registered to vote, much less voted.

In any event, if Democrats actually cared about voting rights and making votes count, they would have done something when they had power in 2009-11. Even after that, they could have at least proposed a bipartisan combination
1) free ID for all;
2) require ID to vote;
3) nationwide standards including paper ballots and optical scan to ensure all votes get counted reliably.

They did none of that, and have instead been enacting NPVIC at the state level, subjecting their own states' actual human voters to easily hacked paperless machines in other states. Even with all their talk about Russia allegedly hacking, they've done nothing about NPVIC, which contains no provisions against fraud or hacking or other abuse.

curious2 says

Dan8267 says

tens of millions

Bad math day, apparently.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/issues/felony-disenfranchisement/

6.1 million today easily means tens of millions over half a century.

Dan8267 says

6.1 million

includes all living citizens who cannot vote due to a past felony conviction, including murderers currently incarcerated. Half a century ago, it was around 1 million.

curious2 says

In any event, if Democrats actually cared about voting rights and making votes count, they would have done something when they had power in 2009-11. Even after that, they could have at least proposed a bipartisan combination

As you have been told many times, they didn't really have power for 2 years, but regardless, that is poor logic. There is clearly a limit to how much can get done in Washington over a certain time period, and the amount of things Dems wanted to do was obviously greater than what could be accomplished over the time period. Especially when health care reform was at the top of the list. So, whatever you think of the final product of the health care reform act, it doesn't follow that because they focused on that act, it means they didn't care about anything else.

And a bipartisan combination? I don't think you're really this naïve.

joeyjojojunior says

As you have been told many times, they didn't really have power for 2 years....

LOL - I have indeed been told that many times, by delusional Democrats. That doesn't make it true, nor even plausible.

I guess in your mind, Republicans don't really have power now, so they can blame Democrats.

curious2 says

LOL - I have indeed been told that many times, by delusional Democrats, but that doesn't make it true, nor even plausible.

I guess in your world, Republicans don't really have power now, so they can blame Democrats.

No, I live in the real world.

joeyjojojunior says

No, I live in the real world.

Then please tell me how Democrats didn't have power in 2009-11, but Republicans do have power now.

curious2 says

Dan8267 says

6.1 million

includes all living citizens who cannot vote due to a past felony conviction, including murderers currently incarcerated.

The source says the 6.1 million figure is just for today and that's only for one kind of suppression, but in any case I'm not far off for a rough estimate. After all, I wasn't citing a statistic but giving the big picture as an order of magnitude and I'm not Google. But I will concede to overestimating the figure a bit. I was in the ballpark unlike the statistics that the conservative right makes up.

In any case, my point stands. Even with the very lowest estimate of six million votes suppressed, it demonstrates that the voter suppression by the Republican Party far outweighs any illegal votes by illegal immigrants. You just can't equate the two.

Dan8267 says

six million votes suppressed, it demonstrates that the voter suppression by the Republican Party

Only Republicans want to incarcerate murderers? And a Republican snuck into the WH and signed Clinton's drug laws while Clinton was busy with Monica?

curious2 says

Only Republicans want to incarcerate murderers? And a Republican snuck into the WH and signed Clinton's drug laws while Clinton was busy with Monica?

The War on Drugs was designed to suppress the vote.

Report: Aide says Nixon's war on drugs targeted blacks, hippies

"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people," former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman told Harper's writer Dan Baum for the April cover story published Tuesday.

"You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities," Ehrlichman said. "We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."

Nixon's Drug War, An Excuse To Lock Up Blacks And Protesters, Continues

The Drug War is the New Jim Crow

I could go on and on.

If you are trying to make the point that Democrats, including the Clintons, are also partly responsible for the travesty of justice call the war on drugs, then yes, that's true. But let's not pretend that Republican politicians didn't create, expand, and protect the war on drugs for the express purpose of suppressing votes.

And no one is saying that we shouldn't lock up murders, but I will say that everyone, even those serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole should have the right to vote. Ultimately, if all people do not have a right, then it is not a right, but a privilege, by definition. Voting should be a right, not a privilege. Our country should be founded on rights, not privileges.

You, of course, are free to disagree with this as it is a matter of principle, not objective reality. However, can you really make the case that the U.S. is the bastion of liberty and democracy if voting is a privilege?

Dan8267 says

can you really make the case

I would never make that case regardless of the vote, which NPVIC might render moot anyway. I lose patience with obvious falsehoods and blaming only ever the "other" party. And I'm still waiting on an answer from JJJr:

curious2 says

joeyjojojunior says

No, I live in the real world.

Then please tell me how Democrats didn't have power in 2009-11, but Republicans do have power now.

curious2 says

. I lose patience with obvious falsehoods and blaming only ever the "other" party.

I despise both parties. They are both corrupt. And I'll gladly blame them both.

However, it is disingenuous to state that both parties are equally to blame. One is a hell of a lot scarier than the other.

Dan8267 says

One is a hell of a lot scarier than the other.

Whichever one is in power, currently the Republicans. However, according to JJJr, they aren't really in power, because Democrats weren't really in power 2009-11. The Democrats' 2016 campaign promises (illegally shooting down Russian planes and killing Russians who are legally present in Syria) didn't reassure me at all.

Usually, I have higher hopes for Democrats, but they're clearly lost at the moment due to a surfeit of JJJr partisans who refuse to take responsiblity for their own policies, borrow&spend as badly as Republicans, and don't even attempt any sort of accountability. They're still going through the five stages of grieving the 2016 result, stuck at denial and anger ('we didn't lose, Russians stole it from us by telling everyone what we were actually saying among ourselves, Russia Russia Russia').

"Usually, I have higher hopes for Democrats, but they're clearly lost at the moment due to a surfeit of JJJr partisans who refuse to take responsiblity for their own policies, borrow&spend as badly as Republicans, and don't even attempt any sort of accountability. They're still going through the five stages of grieving the 2016 result, stuck at denial and anger ('we didn't lose, Russians stole it from us by telling everyone what we were actually saying among ourselves, Russia Russia Russia')."

I have no such high hopes for you and no desire to go down this rabbit hole again with you as I know how it will end after a bunch of back and forth about the filibuster rule and snarky comments from you. Probably a few more lies thrown in there as well.

Please continue to make hilarious jokes about how Dems are terrorist lovers--that is clearly helping to elevate the political discussion. Much better than trying to discover how a foreign government influenced our elections.

In reality, what the Dems should be learning is the extreme damage they face because they lost so many state legislatures. They need to start from the bottom and start winning local and state races. The gerrymandering really is killing them.

Dan8267 says

Free to all persons including the homeless and prisoners.

Homeless people get it in India...what's the rationale for prisoners?

https://www.google.com/amp/m.timesofindia.com/city/aurangabad/homeless-to-get-aadhaar-can-open-bank-a/cs/amp_articleshow/58368473.cms

MMR says

Homeless people get it in India...what's the rationale for prisoners?

1. There is no downside to having a secure national ID for prisoners. They need to be identified at least as much as non-prisoners and the main purpose of a secure national ID is to serve the interests of the state, not the individual.
2. If access to anything is predicated on identity, then prisoners should have the same national ID.
3. Most prisoners get released from prison. Having the national ID before being released would be important for many reasons including reintegrating prisoners into society.
4. Prisoners who are U.S. citizens of adult age absolutely should be allowed to vote. To say otherwise is to state unequivocally that voting should not be a right. Now you are free to hold such a belief, but you have an ethical obligation to be honest about it if you do. Historically, making voting a privilege has only resulted in bad things.

joeyjojojunior says

Probably a few more lies thrown in there as well.

The only one lying in this thread is you. Democrats had power from 2009-11, despite your denial. They did what they did, and were voted out of power. They could have done much better, but chose not to.

joeyjojojunior says

Dems are terrorist lovers....

Your words, not mine. Democrats insist on empowering and spreading a doctrine that commands believers to kill disbelievers, and strike terror into the enemies of Allah. I see what people say and do, but you can tell me how you feel about it: evidently you love it.

joeyjojojunior says

trying to discover how a foreign government influenced our elections.

That happened in plain sight. Hillary Clinton would never have got nominated without the help of her Saudi clients. Hillary's War in Libya and Syria would never have happened without her Saudi clients. Her campaign manager John Podesta hosted a fundraiser with his brother Tony Podesta, who is a registered foreign agent for Saudi Arabia.

If you're worried about foreign governments secretly hacking American elections, then demand Democrats repeal the NPVIC, or at least amend it to guard against hacking. Those paperless, proprietary machines are easily hacked, and leave no audit trail. Democrats pretend to care about counting every voter, but when they have power, they only make the situation worse.

zzyzzx says

The difference is that no one is trying to prevent citizens of legal age from doing any of the activities on the left. Now is Republicans passed a voter ID law that made it damn difficult, and in many cases impossible, to get the ID necessary to purchase beer or go see NASCAR, I bet there would be a lot of red necks grabbing their shotguns and heading down to the state capital.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/virginia-man-sent-jail-registering-dead-individuals-vote-dems-2016/
Virginia Man Sent to Jail for Registering Dead Individuals to Vote for Democrats in 2016