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.
How cute! He wants to try to talk with the adults.
Adaher, you adorable imbecile, those are issues of felons voting without first having applied to reinstate their voting rights. See here: GOP Voter Fraud Hucksters Latest Lie: Felons Made Franken U.S. Senator - Alternet.org
Do you understand that isn’t what everyone else is talking about here? None of those were examples of people presenting themselves as someone else in order to vote.
Guess how many examples of that kind of voter fraud there was in Minnesota in 2008? NONE. And, you may recall, that was a pretty closely scrutinized election.
Oh my god! You fell for that too? I thought you were supposed to be the smart one. I guess your partisan blinders kept you from reading that link, too. Fucking moron. How many of those cases involved anything remotely relevant to voter ID?
Of course, the next time some conservative tells you there’s been hundreds, you’ll slob that shit up as well. Idiot.
Is it your stance, that felon voting is the same thing as in-person voter fraud?
You silly twat.
I guess neither of you actually read the link. Adaher’s link was a report on felons who voted, which is (a.) hardly a scheme to disenfranchise the republic and (b.) not stoppable by voter I.D. since they were still apparently on the voter rolls.
It’s a fact that Bricker will retain for about ten seconds, until the next conservative cunt tells him it’s over a hundred a year, and all of them Liberal provocateurs, and Bricker will nod deeply, eyes shining, because that’s just so TRUE.
He is a weaselly fucker, no doubt, but even that was below his usual weasel-fuck standards. I guess there’s no moral bar that Bricker will not sink below on this topic.
Heh, actually it is. It’s just that the thieves aren’t the voters.
Those cases are very relevant to Voter ID.
As I have repeatedly said, the point of Voter ID is to create a framework that allows prosecution. That’s why I brought up good old Ramon Cue of Miami. Again. And again.
Cue illustrates that even when it looks like someone voted, with no Voter ID, prosecuting them is very difficult.
I know you’ve read my saying that before, but you pretend it vanished. Because …?
The purpose of Voter ID is to discourage illegal voters by creating realistically likely penalties. Voter ID allows a prosecutor to prove they voted.
Umm…wouldn’t a surer method be to just remove them from the voter rolls? Otherwise, you’re attempting to prosecute people for intentionally breaking a law that they may not be intentionally breaking.
Democrats love plagiarism, don’t you? You fuckers just lost a Senate candidate over the issue.
Which was sweet.
Another piece of shit that couldn’t think for himself. He would have been a perfect liberal senator. Just like you, Lobie.
It seems to me that prior attempts to purge voter rolls created howls of outrage.
So, no. A surer method is holding people to obeying the law.
I remember the one case you’ve brought up over and over again because it’s the only fucking case you can name.
So, you intended to deceive then. You are a despicable shitstain, and you perpetuate the impression that conservatives lie about everything. Dirty piece of trash.
Measuring voter fraud cases by the number of convictions makes about as much sense as measuring the murder rate by the number of convictions, or the theft rate by the number of convictions, rather than by how often it’s observed to actually happen.
But you can’t measure it by the number of raw allegations, because those are baseless.
I accuse you of voting improperly. Well, the number in your state just went up by one.
This is like when the NRA collects statistics on how guns have prevented crimes: they count every single anecdote where someone says his gun prevented a crime, but there is no verification process.
Convictions are a standard that is (relatively) objective.
And, yeah, this being the Pit, Bricker is behaving very poorly here. He’s usually a little better than this (he’s actually usually much better than this) but seems to have fallen into a kind of religious frenzy on the subject.
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.
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.
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?”
You’re a stupid, angry man, Bricktop. At least you could be stupid, angry and honest.
No, it proves that someone accepted an ID.
I don’t even know about that issue, which candidate was it?
Also, I wrote that to illustrate what a colossial fucking failure you were. Because you attacked like a savage twat when you didn’t even bother to read the cite.
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.
The cherished illusion was yours, you thought that a cite about felons was a cite about in-person voter fraud.
Keep fucking that chicken. Do you think that the stinking primitive carpenter you put in your mouth every Sunday would approve of you being this dishonest? For shame.
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.