I don’t know how to respond. By avoiding a straightforward claim, you insulate yourself from any attacks.
“So, you WANT Sven to be able to vote?” No, you didn’t say that.
What are you saying?
I think Luci is saying voter fraud doesn’t matter, even when it’s caught. I guess because Sven is only 1 vote out of thousands/millions, so what does it matter if he’s allowed to vote, it’s not going to change anything.
Or maybe he thinks a guy named Sven is destined to vote Democratic.
Or we should all refuse to vote on Sunday.
Or something. I’m not too sure what was meant by that comment.
If you figure it out, tell me.
Read carefully. If your lips get tired, take a break.
Limiting discussion of voter fraud to non citizens is another distraction. As for gathering evidence of voter fraud, how about we go back to that “ask people who have been marked as having voted if in fact they did so” from earlier. Do a survey, or a random sample, or a statistically valid sampling, I don’t care. If you get more than a negligible number of “no” answers, get back to us. That will be evidence that this supposed problem of voter fraud isn’t a trumped up case intended to provide partisan benefits to those proposing the voter ID laws.
As for catching the vote fraud perps, well, either you’ve spent so long focusing on criminal law that your brain has stuck into that groove, or you are willfully diverting the discussion to an area tangential to the thread. Go back and read the thread title again. This is about vote suppression, not about the tribulations of catching criminals. Get the evidence that these crimes are being committed and I will be quite happy to work with you to design regulations to reduce or eliminate them. 'Cause without that evidence, all I’m seeing is a naked partisan power grab based on interfering with the voting of people who lean Democratic.
No shit? Wow, thanks, there, Bricker. But a significant part of why we are having that debate is that you keep trying to drag the debate onto different grounds, where you feel more comfortable. Of course you would prefer we all debate the virtues of voter id, who can blame you. It gets you away from the uncomfortable truth that you support a policy and a party that is stacking the deck. And yes, just as you gleefully point out, their methods are both legal and constitutional. And that doesn’t mean what they are doing is right, it means they will get away with it.
I bring up the Sunday voting thing not because it is a thunderously important issue, but that it exposes the naked fact of the motivation, here. i can ask you again if you like: what voter id issues are involved with that decision? How can it be anything but a means of harassing potential Dem voters?
(The good news? I don’t think it has anything to do with racism, if they had a means to stick it an identifiable group of white Dem voters, they would be on it like a starving dog on a pork chop. Equal opportunity. Progress, sorta kinda.)
This whole voter integrity booshwah is a load of crap, a fancy negligee draped over an aged whore with fifty years of venereal diseases. Its a ploy to gain political power they otherwise do not deserve, and they are using the law to do it. They are twisting the Constitution shamelessly, skirting the letter of the law while buggering its spirit.
And they may very well win as a result. And you? You will be here to tell us such cynical swine are duly elected by the people, and its all legal and Constitutional.
May the ghost of Tom Paine puke on your briefs.
:smack::smack:OMFG
http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10002.html#a0=2
Giant exasperated text mine. The Social Security webmaster doesn’t have tourettes, really.
Specifically,
Surely given she must have went through a temporary phase prior to become permanent, did you simply not think to ask her if her Social Security card is/was different?
Seems like someone who isn’t either a partisan hack, or an idiot would take that basic step.
Quite frankly if someone, who’s a foreign national, still has a 40 year old social security card (give or take a few months), maybe they’re with it enough, and on the American team enough, to vote.
So here we are, cite that the Social Security office keeps track of someone’s citizenship status. Hell they even have the E-Verify service.
You telling me the E-Verify service can’t tell if you’re a citizen?
I just tried it, and using only knowledge in my head (personal history, address, Social Security number), it was able to identify my work status.
Now how could it do that, without knowing I’m a citizen? Quite honestly the level of personal data it must have for the personal confirmation quiz is rather creepy.
But hey, something simple as checking Social Security numbers, and obscure personal history the government has, won’t suppress American Democratic voters, so in before you argue for more voter suppression.
Also if anyone else wants to try the E-Verify self check, have at it:
He’s not in favor of voter suppression! But its a sacrifice that must be made. By sheer coincidence, only Democrats are required to make it, but stern duty demands!
This entire post simply hand-waves away the issue of non-citizens voting. “Catch them somehow, I care not how, and then I will listen to you,” you seem to be saying.
How?
You demand evidence that is virtually impossible to achieve. And without it, you won’t agree to take any action.
Fortunately, you’re not in charge in Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin, Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Michigan, South Dakota, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Virginia, Utah, or Washington states.
So go ahead: withhold your approval until I provide evidence of non-citizens’ voting, even though you know such evidence is virtually impossible to provide. You win.
You win.
Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin, Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Michigan, South Dakota, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Virginia, Utah, Washington.
[QUOTE=The Tao’s Revenge;15185815
Quite frankly if someone, who’s a foreign national, still has a 40 year old social security card (give or take a few months), maybe they’re with it enough, and on the American team enough, to vote.
[/quote]
And that’s ok with you.
See, if I say it’s ok with you, I am being terribly insulting. But it sure seems like you’re saying it’s ok.
Not if you have an SSN issued before 1973, no, not with accuracy. That’s exactly what I am telling you.
Why is it that you can say to me, in effect, “Look, be honest here: killing Sunday voting proves what the motivation must have been.”
I believe two things: one is that the primary motive was something more prosaic, such as funding. But I also concede that knowing that the move would not disadvantage Republican votes made it happen… that is, if the money saving would have hurt Republican voting, more effort would have been made to find another item to cut in the budget.
You demand that kind of concession in honesty from me, and I give it.
In turn, I say things to you about Massachusetts’ senator selection laws, and the most you can do is say that the Republicans dared the Dems to do something bad, and they did.
Why is it you expect me to answer so forthrightly, and still believe you can dodge, duck, dip, dive, and dodge?
And if you can be honest, and clear: why didn’t you care much about Massachusetts?
I say to you the same thing you said to me: “Look, be honest here. Massachusetts’ actions proves what the motivation must have been.”
Well?
I’m kinda curious why you think that this is such a huge issue. I mean, never mind that it’s a problem that will literally kill itself off; from a moral standpoint, it barely even matters. These people who have been here for 40 fucking years might as well be citizens.
Well, with other examples redefined away, I wanted to choose an absolutely unambiguous example.
If you want a more numerous problem, then we can imagine Sven denying he voted, and saying it must have been someone else.
And I don’t agree with the “might as well be citizens” standard.
If that happens, it’s quite obvious that voter fraud occurred, since the record showed that he voted and he says he didn’t.
If Sven were born in 1970, he wouldn’t have gotten his SSN until after 1973, so we’ve got him nailed. (Back then, we didn’t get SSN until we were going to be getting jobs. Parents didn’t need SSN for tax purposes until the 1980s.)
Sven’s going to have no problem getting a Virginia Voter ID and voting under Brickers preferred system.
So, once again we’ve followed Bricker through the knothole to find that he’s full of shit. It would be a very simple matter to get an estimate of voter fraud, rather than some impossible task. And the fact is that it does not occur in any meaningful number.
And yes Bricker, if you want to play childish games of appealing to popularity, everyone sees exactly what is going on here.
What about the Ramon Cue case I linked? Is it quite obvious he’s guilty?
Yes, both the zip code and the date of birth would need to be adjusted to make Sven’s story totally consistent.
But how do those hurt the actual story? How would it be simple to estimate non-citizens voting?
However much my calling that action “sordid” does not reach the pristine refinement of your own personal ethical purity, at the very least I didn’t gloat.
Further, you misrepresented my position on that, and when confronted with that fact, you tried to weasel away from it by claiming that my characterization of their actions amounted to an endorsement when clearly it did not. No, I don’t think it was as bad, for reasons I stated. I also don’t think measles is as bad as smallpox, that does not amount to an endorsement of measles.
As well, this is part of a full-court press, fostered by that eminence greasy, ALEC. About which I am sure you know quite enough that I need not instruct you. This is an effort to shift the balance nationwide, not merely a parliamentary maneuver confined to one state.
More to the point, perhaps, I am not a Democrat, I am a radical type lefty. When I vote, I almost invariably vote for their candidate. I hold that voting is a duty, I am not asked to take a bullet, I am only asked to make a choice, however repulsive such a choice may be. I bear no direct responsibility for the actions of a group of which I am not a member, not is there any likelihood I ever will be.
You, on the other hand, are a Republican, and a Republican partisan.
And as much as I may commend your honesty in recognizing the sordid nature of this action, that really only makes you the best of a very bad lot. An honesty that your gleeful and unabashed gloating renders moot.
Voting is the bottom turtle, there are no more turtles beneath it, it is the very foundation on which all legitimacy depends. You fuck with that, you fuck with everything you claim to hold dear. And they are fucking with that, you know it as well as I.
And you are almost certainly right in this one respect, they will almost certainly get away with it. And when they harvest their ill-gotten gain, if they should prevail, I have little doubt that you will be right here to crow about the will of the people, how they have spoken, how that legitimizes and enshrines your values, such as they are.
It’s easily counted as an instance of voter fraud. The guy registered in his name at his address says he didn’t vote.
How would Virginia’s new voter ID law identify Sven?
Virginia’s law will help the process in two ways:
-
It manes that whoever shows up to vote as Sven has ID that says he’s Sven. This reduces or eliminates Sven’s chance to deny he was the voter.
-
Virginia photo IDs cannot be issued without proof of legal presence. That means either showing you’re a citizen or a legal resident. It catches the pre-1973 person who has a local-office-issue SSN but no INS record.
How? All he has to do in Virginia is show his Social Security Card in Virginia, or indeed a utility bill or bank statement.
In PA which requires photo ID, Sven would only need to show his driver’s license or a university student ID. We still would not catch Sven.
But for our purposes, which again are simply to estimate the amount of voter fraud, even if we want to account for these sextagenarian-plus “sleeper voter fraudsters who have an SSN that might not ascertain citizenship status” that only you are concerned about, all we need to do is check with the SSA. For anyone who comes back undetermined as to citizenship status, if we cannot find evidence of them having a driver’s license or attending a university (or any other source that you want to include in your photo voter ID pool), we can include them in a separate category of “undetermined.”
Examinations of the rate of voter fraud say that it is extremely small. It is not at all “impossible” to determine voter fraud. Anyone who says otherwise is selling you a partisan agenda.