Who cares? There was a factual claim made. It was false.
And it’s hilarious how a measure that impacts less than 10% of the people is horrendous, but 33% of the people don’t matter.
It’s pretty easy to check. You look at the voters roll (public knowledge) and you check it against people who died before the elections (again, public knowledge). The Seattle Post-Intelligencer found 8 cases, 7 of which were due to confusion and human error. I have no reason to doubt the veracity of their investigation. No further evidence was presented in the the court cases by either side. Do you have further information that puts that result in doubt?
I can say with almost absolute certainty that the 33% of Americans who have passports will have no problem meeting the requirements for the various Voter ID laws.
I have plenty of reason to doubt their thoroughness. Did they check deaths in other cities? Other states? How far back?
Did they check citizenship? How? They wouldn’t have had SSN’s to use in E-Verify, and that only reports eligibility to work anyway.
They couldn’t possibly have done a comprehensive review.
Mendacious douchebag! He’s already said that there’s probably around 0.0009% or so.
Well, 0.0009% of 12 strikes would be .01 strikes. So, there are essentially 0 extra strikes on this clock.
You’ve proven that you are a lying douchebag whoring himself to anyone with an R as their party affiliation. Congrats on that.
Here is the Seattle PI’s article.
Far from being comprehensive or rock-solid:
So… when you said, “…you check it against people who died before the elections (again, public knowledge)” were you just funning me? The only people that get listed as dead are the people whose deaths are reported via the state system. What happens if you die out of state?
Do you doubt the thoroughness of the Republican Party whose sole purpose was to prove Gregoire only won because she got fraudulent votes?
ETA - Not to mention that Voter ID will do absolutely nothing to change anything in the cases you mention, where we mostly vote by mail.
That 0.0009% number comes from a guess, from the Brennan Law Center, an organization strongly against Voter ID laws, and it arises from the same sort of limited investigation I’m blowing apart here. That number is shit. It means nothing.
I would hazard a guess that passport holders are more Republican than the electorate at large, so of course they will get to use them as valid ID.
To me, the issues are justice and fairness. I realize that not everyone here accepts these as currency in the marketplace of ideas. The ideal of a democracy is that everyone who wants to cast a vote should be able to cast one. I believe it more just to tolerate a few dozen fraudulent votes than to suppress hundreds of thousands of legitimate votes. Unless you can demonstrate that the number of fraudulent votes allowed is at least as many as the number of legitimate votes suppressed, don’t try to sell me your swill.
You (not intended for any individual, just Republicans in general) say you love freedom and democracy, but you cheer laws that take the votes from people who lack the time to get the ID that you will accept. You say nothing when a state tosses voter applications because they’re on the wrong weight of paper. You don’t mind people in poor neighborhoods having to wait hours to vote because all the machines are concentrated in the white Republican suburbs. You want us to accept all of the opportunities for election fraud made possible by electronic voting. You do so because you’re incapable of dealing in justice and fairness. All you can do is put on your red cheerleader skirt with the red cheerleader panties and jump up and down, waving your red pompons and shouting “Yay, red team”. So go ahead and pleasure yourself at the thought of voters being turned away on election day so that your side can win. Just don’t ask me to join you.
I doubt their capability. How might they find non-citizens, for example, who voted? Specifically.
Frankly if an illegal voter has gone out of their way to make sure they hit all those sweet spots to avoid detection I think they’ve damn well earned the right to vote. That’s some good ol’ American ingenuity right there
Says you.
If dead people voting (or fraudulent voting in general) was as prevalent as you make it out to be I’m sure some right wing think tank would be all over it publishing report after Koch-sponsored report with numerous cases of fraudulent votes tipping elections in favour of the godless heathens.
OK. I won’t.
I don’t need to. My version of weighing integrity of the system versus individual discommodation has already been accepted by a good number of states, and more are coming. I don’t need to sell you anything.
Doubting their capability is wise since the only illegal votes they were able to provide were to their benefit. Perhaps you should doubt more than their capability.
How do you suggest they find non-citizens that vote using Voter ID with a mail in ballot?
Well, you’re welcome to believe that. I don’t. The touchstone for voting is not possessing “good ol’ American ingenuity.” Instead, it’s possessing good ol’ American citizenship.
But I’m not saying there are many elections being swayed. I don’t say any elections are being swayed. Why do you keep attributing that claim to me?
Well, I know why. So you can defeat it, and then tell yourself you have defeated my actual argument by defeating the pretend argument you have assigned me.
No, just doubting their capability is fine, but thank you for the most gracious invitation.
My idea is that absentee ballot systems use serialized ballots, mailed to individuals. This does some violence to the idea of a secret ballot, so perhaps a serialized envelope and an inner ballot that could be removed. I’m not really sure what the right approach is.
So you honestly think fraudulent voters are going to go through the effort of hunting down deceased Washingtonians who are registered to vote in WA but did not currently live there when they passed and then hope that their deaths have not been reported back to the authorities in WA while you assume their identity to cast a single vote in an election with a turnout of 2.6m people?
If someone is prepared to go that effort, how hard do you think it will be for them to circumvent Photo ID laws?
It’s not a huge “hoping” effort. You show up, give the name, and if it’s not on the rolls you say there must be some mistake and leave.
Well from what I can tell you’re a fan of small government and fiscal conservation. Except here where you advocate a useless law that adds another layer of bureaucracy and millions of dollars to state budgets. So I assume that there must be a valid reason for it. The only reason put forward by other(Vote Fraud Threatens Our Nation!) proponents(“It is evident that a small amount of voter fraud could affect the outcome of elections”) of Photo ID laws is the spectre of masses of fraudulent votes swaying elections.
So, birds of a feather and all that…
So now I as a fraudulent voter must potentially drive all over the state of WA for hours at a time to possibly impersonate a resident of WA who has died out of state, whose death has not been reported to the authorities in WA but who is still on the voters roll even though they no longer live in WA. I probably also need to be the same sex as the deceased, and depending on what information is present on the voters role (date of birth etc) I may need to fit their age profile. To cast a single vote.
Like I said before. If you’re looking for a test to prove someone deserves a US citizenship, you just found it.
I have laid out my rationale quite clearly in this and other threads multiple times.
Not once have I suggested there is massive voter fraud afoot. What I have said is that even a very small number of improper votes, if combined with an unusually close election (like Florida 2000, Washington 2004, etc.) would be devastating for voter confidence.
In 1984, in Indiana, the 8th congressional district race was won by four votes. And what if that seat determined control of the House? How do you address voters who regard the Speaker of the House as illegitimate, based on the disputed election in one district?
That’s not a time to haul out your theory about good ol’ American ingenuity being a perfectly acceptable substitute for citizenship.