http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Vote_Fraud_Intimidation_Suppression_2004_Pres_Election_v2.pdf
Start on page 22 or so. Maybe you will find a few (or a lot) of Democrat targets worthy of “disdain and ridicule”.
I don’t click a link to Fox News unless I’m wearing a condom. Too late for you, apparently.
So you’re saying it’s okay to subvert democracy because Johnny down the street did it too?
That’s a pathetic justification that doesn’t fly past kindergarten.
Suppressing the vote on a massive scale in order to win an election is disgusting.
No. I am saying that those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Sure. When Democrats do it as well, right?
Ah, I see you really really like the “but Johnny did it too!” argument. Can any of the Latin scholars on the board help out with a name?
Disenfranchisement sucks, regardless of party. Carefully scrutinizing ballots is a necessary part of a recount, but disqualifying them for picayune reasons for the sake of winning an election is despicable.
Supporting/passing a law with the intent to disenfranchise a group in order to win elections is a much broader infraction of human rights, and worthy of a proportionately larger vitriolic denunciation.
That Johnny did it too does nothing to cleanse the slime from the law.
Agree. Now - does inflating the vote on one side fraudulently “disenfranchise” the other side?
It is? Can you quote me saying that? Please quote the post where I said that.
I’ll wait until you show me where I said the above before I’ll concede that your question has any relevance at all.
Again, I’ll withhold any comment until you show me where I said what you claim I said.
Post #56 when I responded to JRDelirious.
I thought that argument was what your side held. If not, then what is the problem if the ID is free?
You didn’t provide a cite but I think you mean this case? Maybe you can do some research and cite the claim with a decent mainstream newspaper article. The article I linked to quoted the reason as “St. Clair County Clerk Bob Delaney said 1,297 overseas military ballots — many of them connected with Scott Air Force Base — didn’t get sent out until Oct. 4, primarily because he was waiting for a decision on whether the Constitution Party would be allowed on the ballot.”
Not implausible but I hesitate to take the rants of various bloggers as to whether this was a democratic national party disenfranchisement move, incompetency, the way things are typically done in St. Clair County, ad nauseum.
That said, now one can get absentee ballots fairly easily, which means this issue has more or less been solved. It also avoids the county clerk from having to send out ballots with all of the potential problems (delays, lost, etc). This from Republicans Abroad: “You will no longer automatically receive ballots based on a previous absentee ballot request. All U.S. citizens outside the United States who want to vote by absentee ballot in the 2012 primary and general elections must complete a new Federal Post Card Application (FPCA) every year if they wish to vote from abroad. States are now required to send out ballots 45 days before an election. No matter what state you vote in, you can now ask your local election officials to provide your blank ballots to you electronically (by email, internet download, or fax, depending on your state). **You can now also confirm your registration and ballot delivery on-line. Be sure to include your email address on the form to take advantage of the electronic ballot delivery option. ** This is the fastest and most reliable way to receive your ballot on time, and we strongly recommend every overseas voter take advantage of it.”
**Terr **- your other question: does inflating the vote on one side fraudulently “disenfranchise” the other side?
Effectively it does. (One could argue if I vote I am franchised even if the other party fradulently adds a vote to cancel out my vote. But let’s ignore hair splitting.) So, come back with your gotcha already.
Hmm. I think you must mean post #57, since post #56 was your post.
I’m still not seeing where I wrote that “providing a free ID for a voter is still too much of a hassle because they have to find their way to the DMV to get the ID”.
Please either quote the post where I said that, or admit that you were incorrect in your assertion.
That word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.
Are you still sticking with the Grand Ole’ Lie that voter fraud is a massive problem to be fixed by ID laws? Earlier you conceded that this was not the intent of the law. The intent behind the law, and knowing support of it is undemocratic and worthy of scorn, ridicule and disgust.
That there are other shenanigans out there does not make the subject of the thread okay.
From kindergarten: **Doing something wrong is not okay if others on the playground are doing other things wrong. **
It’s not a “gotcha”, since you know where it is leading. The lack of ID checking during voting leaves it ripe to fraud that inflates the vote (apparently on Democrat side, since it’s Democrats that are so adamantly against the ID requirement). Thus Democrats are aiming to disenfranchise the other side (as you agreed).
It’s as much the “intent of the law” as the Democrat opposition to it is because of the altruistic wish to have everyone vote.
Howsabout not putting words in my mouth. Thanks.
Just to clarify. Is it your position that widespread voter fraud exists? Cites would be nice. That said fraud caused the wrong people to be “elected”? Again, cites would be nice. And that voter ID would solve this particular fraud? And that requiring voter ID is not targeted at a particular class of people? That there would be no unintended consequences for requiring voter ID. And that this is solely about preventing voter fraud?
Is the above your position as I don’t want to put words in your mouth.
Then you should have no problem showing evidence of this widespread fraud.
There is fairly widespread voter fraud with absentee ballots, felons voting, etc. Why wouldn’t there be widespread voter fraud using other methods? It is very difficult to prove it, once it happens. Here are some cites for you:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/285771/if-fraudulent-vote-falls-woods-christian-schneider
http://letters.ocregister.com/2011/08/25/may-i-see-your-id-please/#more-23119 - read the first letter
I never said it is “solely” about preventing voter fraud. Just like the people upthread admitted that the Democrats’ opposition to ID checks when voting is not “solely” about caring that every vote counts.
From your cite:
So, even though they can’t prove it, it must be happening, presumably because Democrats keep getting elected. Curses! :mad:
Can you show me huge numbers of people who have no ID and want to vote and can’t?
Aside from the fact that these laws have not been tested in an election, it appears you believe laws should be passed not because they are warranted, but because citizens fail to prove a negative. An odd position for a libertarian.