# I Pit the ID-demanding GOP vote-suppressors (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 12, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943 "2012-06-12T19:15:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 293
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5841 "2014-08-08T03:57:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Intended to deceive how? > > “Deceive” doesn’t happen when the only problem is that you’re too much of a fucking liberal moron to remember what you’re supposed to be arguing against. The issue has always been your claim that some meaningful number of people cast a vote while impersonating a legitimate voter. Now you are trying to conflate that issue with people with a felony conviction casting a vote as themselves without properly petitioning to have their voting rights reinstated first. Seems like the desperate act of a loser. And doing so by claiming that over 100 cases were found, without specifying that those are different types of cases altogether is deceitful. I know you’re an amoral shit. I’m happy you’re letting everyone else know too. #BrickerBookmark ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5842 "2014-08-08T03:58:22Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Because it isn’t relevant. Only a complete moron, like yourself, would think that an untrained ID checker is gonna stand up on the stand to, “Mr. Applebottom, you checked in over a thousand voters that day. Are you sure Mr. Voterfraudensiein voted, and presented a valid ID?” “I was trained in the appearance of valid IDs, and the process I followed was to compare the anti-counterfeiting features of our state’s valid IDs to the ID presented. The entry into the log, which is admissible as a business records exception to the hearsay rule, shows that he voted.” > [@](#): > > No, it proves that someone accepted an ID. A legally sufficient record for conviction. > [@](#): > > Now you’re such a stinking pussy you won’t cop to it and are making up shit about how felon voting is the same thing as in-person voter fraud. You’re a liar, Bricker. On the contrary, that line is making shit up, since I never said they were the same. I said that Voter ID is a valid control against felon voting. Therefore, the instance of felon voting is relevant to the use of Voter ID. That’s what was said. Your version – where I supposedly said, “felon voting is the same thing as in-person voter fraud,” is exactly the kind of falsehood that liberals like you need to sustain their attempts at argument. Almost everyone reading this can read what I said, and how you lied in your version of what I said. You can’t win any argument with the truth, because you can’t use the truth: it fails you. All you can do is look around and hope your libbie buddies continue to value ideological solidarity over truth. So far, you’re doing well in that limited area. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5843 "2014-08-08T04:03:06Z")
> [@AlienVessels](#): > > The purpose of voter ID is to reduce the Democrat vote. That’s pretty much the thing that will make conservatives feel more confident that the results reflect their expectations. > > If it weren’t about that, conservatives would be proposing ways to ensure everyone got ID and everyone had the maximum opportunity to vote. Instead, voting windows are being reduced, and ID requirements are skewed in favor of conservatives, i.e. gun licenses are good supporting ID, college ID is not. Everyone has a reasonable opportunity to vote. I know you guys would like to send private limos to transport voters to the polls, and maybe a catered snack while they wait. The purpose of Voter ID is to ensure confidence in the outcome of elections, especially close elections. The Supreme Court has upheld them. The thread revival comes because the Wisconsin Supreme Court just upheld their scheme under state law. So just because the New York Times and Mother Jones told you what you’re supposed to think does not transform those into truth. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5844 "2014-08-08T04:07:54Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > The issue has always been your claim that some meaningful number of people cast a vote while impersonating a legitimate voter. Of, the issue has always been that, huh? OK. Quote the post where I said that. > [@](#): > > Now you are trying to conflate that issue with people with a felony conviction casting a vote as themselves without properly petitioning to have their voting rights reinstated first. No. I have always said the issue is improper votes cast, no matter the source, and their potential to upset the result of an ultra-close election. I have never suggested the issue was limited to impersonation of voters, and I defy you to find one single post in which I said the issue was some meaningful number of people cast a vote while impersonating a legitimate voter. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5845 "2014-08-08T04:12:01Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > “I was trained in the appearance of valid IDs, and the process I followed was to compare the anti-counterfeiting features of our state’s valid IDs to the ID presented. The entry into the log, which is admissible as a business records exception to the hearsay rule, shows that he voted.” Is it possible, Mr. Crabbapple, that in the rush, given your inexperience with IDs, that you made a mistake? > [@](#): > > A legally sufficient record for conviction. I guess it’s possible a jury will be filled with people as stupid as you are. > [@](#): > > On the contrary, that line is making shit up, since I never said they were the same. I said that Voter ID is a valid control against felon voting. > > Therefore, the instance of felon voting is relevant to the use of Voter ID. > > That’s what was said. Your version – where I supposedly said, “felon voting is the same thing as in-person voter fraud,” is exactly the kind of falsehood that liberals like you need to sustain their attempts at argument. > > Almost everyone reading this can read what I said, and how you lied in your version of what I said. > > You can’t win any argument with the truth, because you can’t use the truth: it fails you. All you can do is look around and hope your libbie buddies continue to value ideological solidarity over truth. So far, you’re doing well in that limited area. Sorry, liar. In case you’re so delusional that you actually believe the shit you sputter: **'luci says:** A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast **Bricker says:** Still, you have quoted a truly inspiring authority: a Washington Post guest-blogger who is a law professor and (gasp!) liberal as the moon is high. He offers his non-binding, libby liberal view of what the law should be. **'luci says:** He’s lying, or he’s wrong about the numbers? OK, prove it. But aren’t you somewhat obligated to do a better job of it than just exposing his unsavory political leanings? **Bricker says:** Adaher’s link shows over 100 in one state. A fact that you will retain for about ten seconds, until the next liberal tells you it’s only been four, ever, and all of them GOP provocateurs, and you will nod deeply, eyes shining, because that’s just so TRUE. So, which is it? You didn’t read the cite, or you read it and were trying to lie about it? That smell, in case you’re wondering, is the permeating stench of failure. It wafts from your very pores. \<3 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5846 "2014-08-08T04:29:27Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > The issue has always been your claim that some meaningful number of people cast a vote while impersonating a legitimate voter. Here’s me in 2012: > [@Bricker](#): > > The problem is that without voter ID, an illegal alien registering to vote, and voting, is a very low-risk proposition. No reliable way to associate a voter with the fact that he voted means almost no risk of prosecution – how do you prove the crime? > > I have made this point a number of times. I don’t recall anyone really rebutting it. What happened to me “always” claiming impersonation? That’s me pointing out an illegitimate voter voting – the same thing that happens when a felon votes. Here’s another conversation in 2012. It’s about felons voting! And what am I saying, two years ago? > [@GAB Board head discusses vote fraud in Wisconsin](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gab-board-head-discusses-vote-fraud-in-wisconsin/624101/6): > > > [@GAB Board head discusses vote fraud in Wisconsin](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gab-board-head-discusses-vote-fraud-in-wisconsin/624101/5): > > > > In the 2010 election I believe there were 7 cases of fraud. Mostly felons trying to vote. > > > > I was trying to get people to watch with an open mind. The whole interview is remarkably cool and calm considering the heated atmosphere in Wisconsin. > > > > A common sense view might be helpful. How much difference does each vote make? The answer is not much. (Margin of victory for Walker last time was 50,000.) Rancid Prebus said fraud would be 1-2% which if two million vote would amount to 20,000 to 40,000 votes. Hard to imagine how that many fraudulent votes could be spread over some 2,000 precincts. You’d need 5,000 or 10,000 people willing to risk their freedom in order to add that many. > > > > Now, if we’re talking about hacking Diebold voting machines like the Republicans did in Ohio in 2004, the task becomes far more managable. > > > > But that’s not what Prebus was implying. > > Under ordinary circumstances, you’re right – with ordinary (even “close” ordinary") the margins are so great that it’s highly unlikely fraudulent votes are decisive. > > But occasionally (Florida presidential, 2000; Washington governor, 2004) the race become razor thin. In Washington in 2004, Christine Gregoire became governor by a margin of 129 votes. > > The problem with not fixing the issue now is that after the fact, when everyone is scrambling to support their side, it becomes impossible. > > The reason to fear voter fraud is not the election where the margin is 10,000. It’s the odd election where the margin is 100. The same thing I have been saying all along. The same thing I am saying today. You are literally unable to process this, and after you read it, you forget it. That’s me from two years ago saying the same thing I am saying now. You can’t remember any of it. Your brain is organically incapable of retaining this information. Is there another explanation? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5847 "2014-08-08T04:40:18Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Is it possible, Mr. Crabbapple, that in the rush, given your inexperience with IDs, that you made a mistake? Since you don’t appear to understand what “legally sufficient” means, why are you still debating this point? > [@](#): > > [INDENT] **'luci says:** A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast > > **Bricker says:** Still, you have quoted a truly inspiring authority: a Washington Post guest-blogger who is a law professor and (gasp!) liberal as the moon is high. He offers his non-binding, libby liberal view of what the law should be. > > **'luci says:** He’s lying, or he’s wrong about the numbers? OK, prove it. But aren’t you somewhat obligated to do a better job of it than just exposing his unsavory political leanings? Not surprisingly, you left out: > [@Bricker](#): > > As extensively hashed out in this very thread, the issue is not a concerted effort to steal an election. It’s an election that comes down to the wire, ultra-close, and for which we cannot trust the results because we don’t know that all the [v]otes came from qualified voters. (Edited to fix typo) So when I THEN said: > [@](#): > > Adaher’s link shows over 100 in one state. I am discussing the very case I just said in the previous post: where votes did not come from qualified voters. > [@](#): > > So, which is it? You didn’t read the cite, or you read it and were trying to lie about it? I choose (C): the post in which I say what I’m talking about is not quoted by you in order to pretend I said something else. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5848 "2014-08-08T04:41:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Here’s me in 2012: > > What happened to me “always” claiming impersonation? > > That’s me pointing out an illegitimate voter voting – the same thing that happens when a felon votes. > > Here’s another conversation in 2012. It’s about felons voting! > > And what am I saying, two years ago? > > The same thing I have been saying all along. > > The same thing I am saying today. > > You are literally unable to process this, and after you read it, you forget it. That’s me from two years ago saying the same thing I am saying now. You can’t remember any of it. Your brain is organically incapable of retaining this information. > > Is there another explanation? Thanks for reminding me. I stand corrected on your past statements. Felons voting when they should not remains completely irrelevant. Voter ID would not prevent them from voting. And you’re still a weaselly amoral shitstain. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5849 "2014-08-08T04:46:47Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Thanks for reminding me. I stand corrected on your past statements. > > Felons voting when they should not remains completely irrelevant. Voter ID would not prevent them from voting. > > And you’re still a weaselly amoral shitstain. I see you STILL don’t remember the past two years worth of what I have said. Voter ID does not directly prevent felons and non-citizens from voting, any more than laws against bank robbery prevent all bank robberies. But the purpose of such laws is to discourage the behavior by creating a legal framework in which those who do it can be reliably convicted. Would you like to see a post from a year ago where I say the same thing? ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5850 "2014-08-08T04:48:46Z")
By the way, can you clear up your misrepresentation of the study in the linked article, weasel-fuck? You seem to have hoped that would just go away. ETA: Could you also please note how many of the “over 100” cases you referenced previously were cases of impersonation? Thanks, weasel-fuck. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5851 "2014-08-08T05:28:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Since you don’t appear to understand what “legally sufficient” means, why are you still debating this point? Because it’s a horseshit point brought up by a stumbling failure trying to justify his hatred of poor people. > [@](#): > > I choose (C): the post in which I say what I’m talking about is not quoted by you in order to pretend I said something else. Of course you do, cumpig. Because, as I showed, you quoted 'luci, who wasn’t talking about that. You said, to 'luci, “Adaher’s link shows over a hundred in one state.” Why would you be answering him and talking about voting felons, when 'luci is talking about in-person voter fraud. You’re lying. Or mistaken. I’m betting the former, because it takes a special kind of talent to be that wrong. And I don’t see an excess of talent in your makeup. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5852 "2014-08-08T05:53:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Mean ol’ conservative won’t let the libbies keep their cherished illusions alive, and that counts as behaving poorly, eh? > > Of course there are few convictions… with no Voter ID, how do you get a conviction? It’s an uphill battle. You’ve sunk this far. I can only grieve for the loss of a human mind. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5853 "2014-08-08T05:56:42Z")
Never goes crazy himself, he’s more of a carrier. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5854 "2014-08-08T11:00:20Z")
I don’t quite get the Ramon Cue case. As I recall, the newspaper cite said that _somebody_ named Ramon Cue voted, and there exists a Ramon Cue who could not have voted legally, but also that there is more than one person named Ramon Cue. Is there more to this story that I’ve forgotten, because if the above is all there is, how is that evidence of\* anything\*? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5855 "2014-08-08T13:45:24Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I don’t quite get the Ramon Cue case. As I recall, the newspaper cite said that _somebody_ named Ramon Cue voted, and there exists a Ramon Cue who could not have voted legally, but also that there is more than one person named Ramon Cue. > > Is there more to this story that I’ve forgotten, because if the above is all there is, how is that evidence of\* anything\*? Evidence that Voter IDs with addresses and names would clear up the confusion nicely. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5856 "2014-08-08T14:05:40Z")
Not \*spreading \*confusion in the first place would be even more effective. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5857 "2014-08-08T14:40:50Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I don’t quite get the Ramon Cue case. As I recall, the newspaper cite said that _somebody_ named Ramon Cue voted, and there exists a Ramon Cue who could not have voted legally, but also that there is more than one person named Ramon Cue. > > Is there more to this story that I’ve forgotten, because if the above is all there is, how is that evidence of\* anything\*? And remember, there really **was** a person named Mickey Mouse who registered to vote through ACORN. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5858 "2014-08-08T15:00:29Z")
_Dramatis personae_: BRICKER, a patient conservative who says the same thing over and over for two years VARIOUS LIBERALS, who cannot comprehend BRICKER’s words but sense that they are bad because Mother Jones said so. They toss in random comments and pretend to be relevant MAXTHEVOOL, an annoying liberal by virtue of the fact that his responses show he DOES understand BRICKER’s words and consistently argues against the actual points BRICKER raises. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5859 "2014-08-08T15:02:55Z")
Why should voters be required to register to vote at all? It costs time and/or money, and poses an inconvenience to some people, which could disenfranchise them. Disenfranchising any would-be voters is unacceptable. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5860 "2014-08-08T15:23:04Z")
**Bricker** : Just to clarify here, it seems to me that what are claiming is your motivation for supporting voter ID laws (to establish a firmer foundation for successfully prosecuting illegal voting of a variety of sorts, not just in-person voter impersonation; and therefore to provide a stronger disincentive against people engaging in such acts) is a fairly subtle point, and not one that I’ve heard discussed by the Republicans who are actually proposing the laws. Do you think your motivation is the same as their claimed motivation? (Not sure it really matters one way or the other, but I’m curious). **Lobohan** : The point you are making in 5839 is, imho, quite wrong. If there’s a legal requirement that every person who votes have an ID checked, and if someone named “Joe Bob” voted last election, and if the person named “Joe Bob” should not have legally been allowed to vote, and if someone actually does some after-the-fact analysis and realizes this, then having had a voter ID law in place certainly makes a prosecutor’s case STRONGER against Joe Bob, because there’s now good evidence (if not proof) that the person who showed up claiming to be Joe Bob had ID with the name Joe Bob. (Although it’s clearly ridiculous in this day and age of computers for a voting precinct to have a list of the people who are registered to vote there, but NOT to have the additional information that these 32 of them have been stricken off the roles due to being felons, or what have you.) All of that said, is there a nationwide epidemic of cases where: (a) Someone was on the voter roles (b) But they were not allowed to vote, despite still being on the voter roles © And they voted (d) And then they were prosecuted for voting (e) But the case fell apart (or was not prosecuted at all) due to lack of evidence? Even if that’s now the problem that Bricker is attempting to solve (and, given that he has praised me for actually reading his posts, I find it a bit telling that up until now I would not have said that this level of ability-to-prosecute was the PRIMARY goal of his support of voter ID, as he now seems to maybe saying), that still strikes me a lot like the epidemic-of-in-person-voter-impersonation-fraud or the epidemic-of-people-not-having-confidence-in-the-outcomes-of-elections that we previously thought he was trying to solve, in that none of those actually seem to be real and substantial problems. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=292) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=294)