So, you implicitly admit to making up that "millions" nonsense, when you said "there would have to be millions of fraudulent votes." No one else had said that. Of course, you have still failed to show where there has ever been an actual case of sufficient numbers of voter impersonators, risking fine and imprisonment, to alter an election's outcome. You have not cited a single one. So, you do support instituting an additional layer of bureaucracy that involves establishing guidelines and teaching them in a training programme among other things, but you don't explain how a fake picture ID could be distinguished from a real one by poll nannies, "trained" or otherwise. Most ordinary picture IDs are easy to simulate. I have reservations I would have to consider carefully, but I'm pleased that I got you to come out and endorse a national identity card. Like the vast majority of Americans, I think that background checks are a reasonable safeguard to prevent homicidal maniacs and violent criminals from easily obtaining firearms.
Post where I said that. Posted several times and have no obligation to post it again, just search "close elections" and it will pull up the Wiki page listing such close elections. Still waiting for you to prove this "additional layer of bureaucracy". I've never been opposed to it no "coming out" necessary, you really should learn to know what you are talking about before you make such statements. But see that you didn't get the answer you wrongly assumed you would and now you attempt to back away from it, a little dishonesty there I see. Which require and ID which doesn not infringe on ones right to purchase and carry that firearm anymore than showing an ID to vote infringes on any right to vote. Both are prudent and common sense measures. Glad to see you come out and admit having to show an ID does not infringe upon ones rights.
Let them keep howling about ID. This issue more than any other is going to turn off the center, and not in the way the left hopes to turn off its low info blocs.
Exactly! Why risk all that for voter fraud? Makes no sense. Which, if the right were honest with themselves, they would know their whole argument is about as strong as arguing over how good a mud sandwich tastes.
But it didn't now did it? Just another example of a solution looking for a problem. Ridiculous! - - - Updated - - - The courts are now understanding the unconstitutional nature of these ID laws. They are striking them down.
Because it is not about voter ID. It is about voter suppression. Which is another name for cheating. - - - Updated - - -
How do you know and how do you prove. The fact is it does NOT have to be widespread as you and others assert. A couple of strategically placed fraudulent votes can sway an election and using commons sense measures to insure that doesn't happen is a no brainer. - - - Updated - - - No it i about voter fraud which the left does not want to suppress which is another name for cheating. We get it. There is NO reason NOT to have a simple common sense voter ID process in place.
Take it up with the courts. They deemed it unconstitutional. Sort of destroys your argument doesn't it?
True. All you need to do is accurately guess the exact count of an election beforehand, anticipating that result will be decided by a single vote, and then get two criminals to break the law and risk the applicable penalties ton cast illegitimate votes the other way, and, Voilà!, you've swayed an election. That probably could happen nearly as often as that room full of monkeys with typewriters churning out the complete works of Shakespeare. (Just be sure you don't give both your co-conspirators the same fake id with that picture of your brother Darryll that fell in a well last month to flash at the poll nanny - and she's also especially vigilant for the occasional evil twin trying to vote.)
Deportation to Cuba. Since most of the ones committing fraud will be liberals anyway. Send them to their paradise and be done with them.
nocturnal enuresis Your mindless bias is quite consistent, however conspicuously lacking in substantiation. I really hope you seek help for all those pesky "Liberals!" festering in your noggin. . "I see liberal people!"
Total BS. Well, for example you link to a story about 950 dead people casting ballots in South Carolina. That's an old story, after a thorough investigation the number has been revised, the new number, is ZERO. All 950 instances of dead people voting have been investigated and in every case, investigators found that clerical errors had been responsible for what appeared to be voter fraud. http://www.free-times.com/blogs/18-...rcement-closes-case-on-zombie-voters-finds-no
This delusion is rapidly going the way of the "birther" insanity that reached a point where most in the GOP realized it was becoming a liability and branding them all as nutters. Randall Paul: Everybodys gone completely crazy on this voter ID thing. I think its wrong for Republicans to go too crazy on this issue because its offending people.
The logic for assuming there is a low level of voter fraud is the fact that the advocates of tougher restrictions on voting cannot find any significant instances to justify their position. Is is usually incumbent on those advocating change to justify the reason for the change. In the case of voter fraud this has not been accomplished.
White flag noted. - - - Updated - - - No you don't have to have an exact count and we are very very good at predicting how close elections will be. Then a few fraudulent votes............... That is why such common sense measures as voter ID are important and perfectly reasonable.
"No fraudulent votes were actually cast. But in nine instances, clerks readily handed over ballots after a would-be voter implied he was the city resident, recently deceased, still listed on the voter checklist, according to a video posted on the Internet. After receiving the ballot, the person departed without voting." That's just nine that could have been cast had the people intended to do so instead of just proving the point. And if you read the report there were 7 confirmed illegal votes and 5 they could never determine leaving them highly suspect. Considering how hard it is to catch such fraudulent voting.
I've touched on this before already. There is a silly jump often made, like there are only 12 voter fraud convictions per year, so it's obviously not a big deal. :/ the unstated assumption being that the number of convictions is representative of the actual occurrences. It's like saying we only arrested 40 pot dealer last year in Massachusetts - it's such a good thing that there were only 40 times that people bought pot. ^_-
You had said, "A couple of strategically placed fraudulent votes can sway an election," and it follow that, if you correctly guessed that an election would be won by one vote, your "couple of strategically placed fraudulent votes" would , indeed, "sway an election." If you are shifting to imagining local elections, the smaller the community the more likely the poll nannies know the voters, of course, so bringing in impersonators to cast the few bogus ballots to alter the outcome is far less likely to succeed. Now, if your talking about just a few hundred votes, it's theoretically possible for you to organise and coordinate your few hundred fraudulent voters plus a margin of victory as well, and issue them all your fake IDs, but it's an incredibly dumb way of possibly altering the outcome of an election, Savvy fixers would laugh at it, and opt for hacking into computer tabulations and/or tampering with absentee ballots. It's easy to understand why Rand Paul would proclaim, Everybodys gone completely crazy on this voter ID thing. I think its wrong for Republicans to go too crazy on this issue because its offending people. Erecting the ineffectual level of bureaucracy may be enough to suppress the vote of some folks, but Paul seems to recognize it's silly as well as offensive.
So when the link you posted that 950 dead people voted turns into ZERO when 950 cases are actually investigated by law enforcement, you come back referring to a video posted on the internet. See the difference in the sources, "investigated by law enforcement", the result is zero illegal votes. But "posted on the internet" 7 illegal votes and 5 highly suspicious. So if they are confirmed illegal votes, do you have the names of the accused, the indictments, the docket numbers? You know, the stuff that happens when an illegal vote is actually found.....in reality....
It's more like 950 dead people voted in South Carolina, and when law enforcement investigated 950 cases of alleged voter fraud they found zero voter fraud. They found clerical errors and other mistakes that accounted for each and every one of the 950 suspected fraudulent votes. Here's why they don't find very much, it doesn't happen very much, because of the lack of incentive. You risk a felony conviction, to net out ONE extra vote for your guy, and if your guy was Romney, he still lost by six million votes, even if the two people they caught trying to vote twice for Romney had gotten away with it, it wouldn't make a difference. And yes, occasionally there is an election that is decided by a few votes, but nobody knows that it's going to be a few votes, it could easily be a few hundred, and even if it's 10 votes, you're only scoring ONE additional vote, maybe 2 or 3 if you drive around, but if you get caught thats a world of hurt and Romney still lost by six million votes. That's why it's so rare, because there is no incentive to do it. And on a large scale it requires organization and lots of people and such enterprises are always exposed, and yet they haven't been exposed, which is a good sign that they don't exist.
... and the elections that are, predictably, decided by the closest margins are local, those with the fewest voters, where impersonators are most conspicuous. Voter impersonation, with or without an easily faked ID, is an incredibly dumb way of attempting to pervert an election, but adding that additional level of ineffectual bureaucracy is a marginally subtler method of voter suppression than others that have been attempted.
