those voter ID laws are really working to stop voter fraud

[smileyeagle1021]

Yup, already cases of voter fraud this election
Man arrested for dumping Virginia voter registrations

so glad all those voter ID laws were in place to prevent this type of fraud from occurring... oh wait, that's right, they don't do anything to prevent this type of fraud occurring.

[daleduke17]

But, what I was told in other threads is that voter fraud does not happen at all. What voter ID laws would stop is Rob Johnson going to the polls claiming to be the people that the forms said.

I'm glad it was caught before anything nefarious happened.

Which of the following has the greater probability of happening from the story: True Republican being an idiot, or Democrat posing as a Republican to try and put a black eye on the Republicans?

[crashhelmet]

I'm curious if there is any link between the 8 registrations he tossed. Are they all democrat (he was hired by the Republican Party)? All minorities? All Women?

Why these 8 registration forms and only these 8? Did any other employees toss anymore in other trash cans? Why not use a paper shredder or burn them?

None of the articles I've seen have said anything answer these questions.

[daleduke17]

I'm curious if there is any link between the 8 registrations he tossed. Are they all democrat (he was hired by the Republican Party)? All minorities? All Women?

Why these 8 registration forms and only these 8? Did any other employees toss anymore in other trash cans? Why not use a paper shredder or burn them?

None of the articles I've seen have said anything answer these questions.

I was thinking that as well. It would be really odd for a Republican to toss a bag full of Republican registrations.

[Andara Bledin]

But, what I was told in other threads is that voter fraud does not happen at all.

No you weren't; not even remotely. What you were told is that fraud committed by voters that would be stopped by requiring IDs would do jack and shit to stop the vast majority of voting fraud, most of which is committed on the other side. You know, like this case.

I was thinking that as well. It would be really odd for a Republican to toss a bag full of Republican registrations.

Well, according to an article at Current.com, this is part of an orchestration of disenfranchisement that's been going on for some time.

Additional information about alleged voter fraud conducted by people working, ultimately, for the RNC in voter registrations (and de-registrations, it would seem): article at TPM

^-.-^

[daleduke17]

No you weren't; not even remotely.

Incorrect... you were even the one who told me that it doesn't happen... ever:

http://fratching.com/showthread.php?t=6677&page=6 (sorry, cannot link to the actual post - it is about halfway down or so)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fire_on_High
So how do the 999 ppl who just had their legal vote negated by an invalid voter feel about that?

When and if it ever happens (because it hasn't. ever), then people who've had this sort of thing happen can get back to you on that.

[Andara Bledin]

Incorrect... you were even the one who told me that it doesn't happen... ever:

http://fratching.com/showthread.php?t=6677&page=6 (sorry, cannot link to the actual post - it is about halfway down or so)

I never said that voter fraud via voting while ineligible never happened.

I said that voters having their legitimate votes "invalidated" by others committing voter fraud that would be stopped by requiring IDs never happened.

You were even so kind as to include the quote I responded to while completely missing the fact that it didn't say what you are trying to say that it said.

^-.-^

[daleduke17]

I never said that voter fraud via voting while ineligible never happened.


I said that voters having their legitimate votes "invalidated" by others committing voter fraud that would be stopped by requiring IDs never happened.

^-.-^

Legitimate votes are invalidated whenever someone fraudulently votes. Why would you put invalidated in quotations if that is what really happens?

[s_stabeler]

Legitimate votes are invalidated whenever someone fraudulently votes. Why would you put invalidated in quotations if that is what really happens?

a) what Andara was actual saying was that voter fraud doesn't mean that 999 people are impersonated by one fake voter. Matter of fact, impersonation of voters is so rare as to be basically non-existent. How voter fraud usually occurs is dicking about with the voter registrations, like in the article in the OP, or more commonly, by getting people's names on the list who aren't actually on it.
b) not meaning to be rude, but there is a tradeoff between combatting voter fraud and disenfranchising legitimate voters. No matter what, legitimate voters will end up disenfranchised by picture ID laws ( leaving aside the fact that people can look quite different during the time your average picture ID is valid, so people might be turned away due to the clerk not being able to confirm the voter is the one in the picture) due to being unable to get ID (the cost of the documents necessary is one and I'm not talking about the actual ID either.) So you need to balance the numbers of fraudsters prevented against the number of legitimate voters disenfranchised. With picture Id requirements, possibly one or two across the nation are prevented from committing fraud. There are many more confirmed cases of legitimate voters being turned away.

[Andara Bledin]

The word is in quotes because it's your word, not mine. I think your position is grossly oversimplified and an incredibly inaccurate representation of what really happens when people vote despite being ineligible.

A single ineligible voter has effectively zero impact on a general election. It would take more than 100 such concentrated in a single precinct and voting in concert to begin to sway any but the most razor-thin of contests. Voter ID, on the other hand, has been proven to have invalidated the voting ability of thousands before we've even reached the latest election.

How do you reconcile fighting against the former while simultaneously arguing for the latter?

^-.-^

[daleduke17]

I'm done talking about this. I am no longer going to speak about voting eligibility on here as apparently there should be no accountability on it. That is another cause of voter apathy as well.

I really do not care if you think I am a quitter. I have shown my arguments and evidence, and am apparently still in the wrong.

[Andara Bledin]

It's a shame that you aren't willing to provide a cogent argument as to why it is ok for the state to make it so that thousands of votes will not be counted in a single city, yet not ok for perhaps a dozen or so people to vote when not allowed.

^-.-^

[smileyeagle1021]

It's a shame that you aren't willing to provide a cogent argument as to why it is ok for the state to make it so that thousands of votes will not be counted in a single city, yet not ok for perhaps a dozen or so people to vote when not allowed.

^-.-^

exactly... isn't our legal system based on the idea of it is far better to let a guilty man free than to falsely punish an innocent man. I would much rather have a few cases of voter fraud (there has never been enough in person voter fraud at the polls to swing an election anyway) than to stop any people who have the legal right to vote from voting.

[Panacea]

The problem with arguing about voter fraud is that the so called "solution" of Voter ID does not address other methods of voting that are far more subject to fraud than showing up at the polls and pretending to be someone else.

Pretending to be someone else is easy to catch, because each name on the rolls can only vote once. That's why it is practically unheard of. Dead voters remain on the rolls, but there is little evidence anyone actually votes in their names.

Voter ID does nothing to address absentee ballots. Anyone can fill that in and send it in, no ID required to obtain it or use it. But absentee voters tend to vote Republican, which is why it isn't included.

As for Mr. Small: throwing away the ballots may not be politically motivated. He may just have been lazy. But it does seems odd that he would bother to get them filled out and not turn them in, since he's probably paid based on how many people he registers. It makes me wonder how many of those 8 were Democrats.

Years ago, when I first moved to California, I thought I might be in the town I lived in (Salinas) for awhile. So when a guy approached me about registering as part of a Democratic registration drive, I said OK, but told him I was a Republican. He said that was no problem, and he could register me anyway. I filled out the form myself, and checked the R box.

When I got my voter card, I was registered as a Democrat. It really pissed me off at the time, as I was a die hard Republican at the time. But my plans had changed, and I'd moved to Chico, so I had to reregister to vote anyway, which I did at a government office (can't remember if it was DMV or the Post Office), and switched it back to R. I should have complained, but didn't.

Point is, both parties are capable of this kind of nonsense.

[Andara Bledin]

I filled out the form myself, and checked the R box.

When I got my voter card, I was registered as a Democrat.

It's highly probable that there was no silly business going on. If the majority of their registrants were signed up as Democrat, they could have been on autopilot.

I do something pretty much just like that on a regular basis at my job. >_<

As far as I know, the only thing that the party designation does is allow you to vote for that party's primary candidates. Note: Open primaries are a lie; sure, you can vote for anyone, but if you don't vote for your party, your vote isn't counted.

^-.-^