Yes, you DO have to show that voter fraud is actually happening

[elucidator]

And now comes the Congressional Black Caucus, calling for a Faith Leaders Summit on voter rights, cheekily titled Get Souls to the Polls. Got a good beat, easy to dance to…

As reported by my good friends at Daily Kos…

'Souls to the polls': Black churches push back against voter suppression

(Yep, lefty as all get out, if they’re lying, prove it and good for you!)

There’s a lot on their agenda, but one point is of particular interest. Note the following subheading: They oppose efforts to “Reduce or eliminate early voting periods (including the Sunday before elections, which counted for 32 percent of the African-American voter turnout in Florida in 2008)”

Can anyone who favors this stuff explain to me exactly how this advances the cause of voter integrity, and the all important confidence of the electorate? Seems to me this actually decreases the confidence of one portion the electorate, in that it seeks to drastically reduce their access to voting.

It would be fair to say, I think, that this insult to their citizenship might well impact their confidence in voter integrity, being as it is a naked attempt to limit the number of colored voters. How is the all important confidence of the electorate enhanced by such an effort?

A ray of sunshine intrudes into the fever swamp. If this effort bears fruit, and massive numbers of colored voters register to vote, and then vote, it may have a powerful impact. True, the Democrats may lose the crucial illegal alien and felon demographic, but it may be more than made up for with increased voter turnout amongst other groups who tend to favor Democrats.

Dare we hope it proves to be enough to flush out the scoundrels who started this crap festival? We dare to hope, sometimes, it is all we have. And sometimes, if the Goddess shall cease to avert Her eyes, it works.

[elucidator]

@Rhythmdvl

… BrainGluten… …

Indictment pending, with admiration.

[Rhythmdvl]

Oops! To make matters worse, that post has been there for a while and no one noticed–it’s not like it was only posted yeasterday.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@Rhythmdvl

Thread: Get-out-the-vote and voter suppression are not equally legitimate political tactics;
.

Hey, I remember that thread!

Continuing the guy I’m bitching about:

Here's an idea that may help prove things once and for all:
Let us do everything we can to improve the integrity of the system: the photo ID and thumb print, dead voter scrubbing, prosecution of those engaged in vote buying and other forms of corruption as well as other reforms you might think of and see if Democratic voter turnout declines relative to Republican turnout. If it doesn't, I will concede y'all won this thread.

:smack:

[Gangster_Octopus]

Question: Should a voting system err on the side of making sure folks who shouldn’t vote don’t get the opportunity, or should it err on the side of making sure folks who are allowed to vote should get the opportunity?

[Bosstone]

@Gangster_Octopus

Question: Should a voting system err on the side of making sure folks who shouldn’t vote don’t get the opportunity, or should it err on the side of making sure folks who are allowed to vote should get the opportunity?

In my experience, that’s the question that defines whether you are a conservative or liberal with regard to civic/social programs.

Left-leaners would prefer to enable access to all honest recipients of a program (in this case, voters) at the expense of allowing some fraudsters the opportunity to take advantage of the program. Right-leaners would prefer to prevent all fraudsters at the expense of preventing some honest recipients from using the program.

Obviously that’s a bit general, but it does seem to hold true whether we’re talking about voting, border security, welfare, healthcare, etc.

[Stratocaster]

@Rhythmdvl

Though I am aware of the semantical differences of legal terms of art (thank you, Georgetown Law), it matters not what you name the rose, a “price” on voting is walks and quacks; it’s a form of a poll tax.

Wow, it is rare indeed that someone willingly provides the evidence for how dishonest his assertion was. So, if not called on it, you would have just let that bullshit hang there as if it were true, huh? Sorry, this was really bad, even for this board.

[BrainGlutton]

@Stratocaster

Wow, it is rare indeed that someone willingly provides the evidence for how dishonest his assertion was. So, if not called on it, you would have just let that bullshit hang there as if it were true, huh? Sorry, this was really bad, even for this board.

You’re wrong, Rythmdvl is right. The Tao’s Revenge said it best.

[Stratocaster]

@BrainGlutton

You’re wrong, Rythmdvl is right. The Tao’s Revenge said it best.

Now the two of you are wrong. Bricker pointed out that a court decision said the cost of a birth certificate is not considered a poll tax. He has also said he supports voter ID so long as the state provides free ID to those who can’t afford it. That equates to supporting a poll tax? Do you know what a poll tax is? This is dishonest nonsense.

[sqweels]

Voter fraud is a serious crime and it usually takes thousands of votes to turn around an election, so what incentive is there for anyone to try and double-vote? There’s no way someone is going to conspire to recruit thousands of people to double-vote and expect to get away with it.

[sqweels]

@Bosstone

Left-leaners would prefer to enable access to all honest recipients of a program (in this case, voters) at the expense of allowing some fraudsters the opportunity to take advantage of the program. Right-leaners would prefer to prevent all fraudsters at the expense of preventing some honest recipients from using the program.

Except when defrauding a safety-net program the incentive is large amounts of money, and the problem is the loss of large amounts of money. With voter fraud the incentive is just to put one extra drop in the bucket and the problem is that there’s just one extra drop in the bucket.

[dngnb8]

Fraud occurs. The question, (and it is a perceptive value) is how much.

The real issue is that because the process is so… antiquated, it is impossible to tell how much we dont know about?

Simply to say we havent caught them doesnt mean it isnt happening.

Recently, I received a data file with quite a few errors. I sent the file back because there was “enough” questionable data that gave me doubts about the file content.

(I gotta stop hitting the ctrl key while typing) When enough events occur, it creates doubt. How many of those events differ from person to person. 5 events may give me doubt, 50 for someone else. The doubt may even be based on who wins…

I have my doubts about voter fraud. I dont see why asking for a form of official ID is an issue.

[elucidator]

One more time: its not the question of photo ID itself, it is using that as an excuse to create a partisan advantage.

[Sitnam]

@elucidator

One more time: its not the question of photo ID itself, it is using that as an excuse to create a partisan advantage.

Fuck, who knows, maybe the majority of fraudulent voters are voting Republican. It isn’t like anyone is walking around with actual facts here.

[Cheesesteak]

@dngnb8

The real issue is that because the process is so… antiquated, it is impossible to tell how much we dont know about?

Bullshit. The names of every person who votes in every election is kept in a poll book. It’s impossible to find out if the person who signed the book was eligible to vote?

We’ve cracked the atom, sent a man to the Moon, sent robots to Mars, but we can’t figure out if Miss Emily Ledbetter 123 Fake St. Springfield is a legal voter?

[Bricker]

@Cheesesteak

Bullshit. The names of every person who votes in every election is kept in a poll book. It’s impossible to find out if the person who signed the book was eligible to vote?

We’ve cracked the atom, sent a man to the Moon, sent robots to Mars, but we can’t figure out if Miss Emily Ledbetter 123 Fake St. Springfield is a legal voter?

So far as I am aware, the voter does not sign the book.

This leads to cases like Cue, a man who is not a citizen, registered to vote, and who voting records show has voted at least once.

But:

Cue, 53 and from Miami, told The Herald he’s a schizophrenic, doesn’t remember voting and said three others have his same name and birth date.

“I’ve never voted a day in my life,” Cue said. “I’ve lived in this house for 14 years and I have never filled out any paperwork regarding voting.”

Now, if he needed to show a photo ID that had his address when voting, that would go a long way towards clearing up which Raymond Cue voted.

We can figure out if Miss Emily is a legal voter. We check her ID.

[elucidator]

All of which is perfectly dandy. All these problems can be fixed with patience and sincerity. Why, we could even have an outreach program, register tons and tons of previously unregistered voters. Boy, just imagine the Republican enthusiasm for such an effort, bring in great hulking gobs of previously unregistered voters! Their hearts would brim over with civic virtue as they rushed to support such an effort!

I suggest a program to provide umbrellas as well, since when pigs fly, pig flop will rain down from the skies…

[CalMeacham]

We’ve cracked the atom, sent a man to the Moon, sent robots to Mars, but we can’t figure out if Miss Emily Ledbetter 123 Fake St. Springfield is a legal voter?

Auric Goldfinger: Man has Split the atom, sent rockets to the Moon, performed miracles in every field of human endeavor…EXCEPT VOTER FRAUD!

[Sinaptics]

@Bricker

Now, if he needed to show a photo ID that had his address when voting, that would go a long way towards clearing up which Raymond Cue voted.

We can figure out if Miss Emily is a legal voter. We check her ID.

So far I and several others have brought up the point that, as far as we can tell, ID doesn’t show if you’re a non-citizen or a felon. So how is this supposed to help exactly?

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Bricker

We can figure out if Miss Emily is a legal voter. We check her ID.

Didn’t you tell me it will be possible for someone to have a fake ID?