It will soon be nationwide as a common sense measure to insure the integrity of our voting system something to which you seem to care not a twit.
950 which shouldn't have been questionable to begin with and I gave you the numbers of how many from just THAT group that were either proven illegal votes or could not be proven either way. As I said it doesn't take by a few in a close election. , you come back referring to a video posted on the internet. Try reading your own cite and it's sourcing. - - - Updated - - - And that is a lie, you should REALLY read you own cites and the report to which it is referring.
That is the flimsy pretext for voter suppression, and it's proponents have been impotent in showing how voter impersonators, with or without fake IDs to flash at a poll nanny, are compromising the integrity of our democracy. At least Rand Paul is telling the nutters it's time to get real. .
So how many cases of voter fraud have there been in the last several elections that would warrant the nonsense that we see from the right wing who obviously have an interest in suppressing the vote? In referencing logic you offer this analogy; "It's like saying that if there were half a million people arrested for selling drugs last year, then there were only half a million drug sales last year". Ok...then how many were there? A million? 10 Million? You're assuming a scenario in which massive voter fraud exists and only .0002% were caught. Do you have evidence of some kind of massive voter fraud taking place, because nobody has seen any. I can see a motive for drug sales. Money. Some would consider the payoff worth the risk. But what is the motive for voter fraud? If you get caught you go to prison. What do you gain that is worth the prison time?
But your own argument is built on an assumption of much greater occurrence without presenting any evidence of how great that might be. And furthermore you're equating a drug deal that probably takes place daily where money is exchanged and some people actually make a living from it, with an election that takes place at the most, once every two years, and more to the point of this nonsense, every 4 years...and there is no money motive. Tell me WHY anybody is going to risk a prison term, to stuff a ballot box? What do they get out of it? It's going to take a lot of stuffing to swing an election. And the penalty is severe. What does anybody gain from doing it? And on top of this, there is no evidence of voter fraud, and your argument is that this doesn't mean it isn't happening. So we are supposed to enact a law that imposes new restrictions on voters, because "some people" claim that there is voter fraud going on...despite the fact that we can't find any evidence of it. We're supposed to simply make new laws based on a conspiracy theory? And then...we're supposed to accept the explanation that this has nothing to do with suppressing the vote of minorities, when the conservatives have a long history of doing exactly that very thing.
I don't think so. The courts are striking down these stupid voter ID laws in the states. There is nothing wrong with the integrity of our voting system. Why are you trying to make it harder for people to exercise their right to vote?
That one is old hat, and it is again a case where you're fudging with numbers. 207 cases reviewed, 10 with 'insufficient information to make a determination', 197 where officials found 'no evidence of fraud.' Note they never disproved it, which as others have said is as simple as a phone call. Which still leaves the obvious problem earlier mentioned - it's not incredibly hard, it's nearly impossible to be caught, and the numbers you rely - convictions - are complete bs as a number for actual cases. Again, that's like goober saying that there were 30 people arrested last year in his home state - good thing there were only 30 pot sales last year in his home state.
No, I'm not assuming that only "0.0002%" are caught, I'm pointing out the obvious error in the logic you'd put forth, which maintains that the number of actual occurrences is limited to the number of voter fraud convictions - nevermind that a single case of voter fraud may include convictions for multiples counts. And your counter is built on the assumption that the number of actual cases isn't any greater than the number of convictions, in a case where getting away with it is pretty easy, and getting tracked after the fact is hard, and the state doesn't pursue the issue aggressively. Oh, but do you think the penalty for selling a bag of weed is worth getting that $40 sale? So obviously no one would ever sell weed, per your logic. It's that simple - people assume that they won't get caught, or believe the risk is worth it.
ROFL no yours is a flimsy pretext to allow illegal and fraudulent voting instead in instituting nationwide the simple common sense measure of voter ID at registration and at the polling place. - - - Updated - - - And they strike downs are being struck down or the laws amended. Without voter ID there is questionable integrity. There is NO sound logical reason NOT to have voter ID. Why are you trying to make it easy to cast a fraudulent vote as has been demonstrated?
Evidence has been presented in spite of the fact that it is very hard to prove. You seem to believe that NO voter fraud every occurs, where did you get that idea? Not in a close election. DUH It has been posted over and over. Voter ID is a simple common sense measure that intrudes on no ones "right to vote".
You quoted something that didn't come from my link, maybe you made it up yourself, or maybe you read it in something you linked to. What I linked to was an article on the report from the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, which investigated all 950 allegations and found zero voter fraud. Every allegation was a clerical or machine error of some sort.
YOU reference the reported and linked to it. Read what you are citing next time. And that is a lie as showed, go read the report.
There need to be a balance between a deterance and just punishment. I've seen very high punishments for crime, for the simple reason to scare and deter others, and are grossly disproportinate to the crime in question.
I demonstrated that it was BS, and you are arguing that not all of it was BS, that although the allegation that 950 dead people voted was completely without merit, there was a reference to a video posted on the internet that wasn't investigated SOOOOO, that could be true, LOL
I don't allow illegal and fraudulent voting. I support the fines and penalties to which one is subject for doing so. Nor do I pretend that flashing a fake ID at a poll nanny is a solution to a non-existent problem. If I wanted to discourage certain folks from voting, I do understand that the additional bureaucracy imposed upon them would suppress their votes, but I would not admit that is my actual intent, despite having no other credible one. I would pretend that there are sufficient numbers of conspirators coordinating schemes to pervert elections in that bizarre manner, despite having no evidence of that happening, and despite the common sense conclusion that it isn't. I would appear very dumb, of course, but I would still persist in claiming such nonsense if I were hellbent on making it harder for poorer Americans to vote. Meanwhile, I recognize that hacking into vote tabulation and/or tampering with absentee ballots are potential ways to rig election results, and would take steps to insure that does not happen. “Everybody’s gone completely crazy on this voter ID thing. I think it’s wrong for Republicans to go too crazy on this issue because it’s offending people.” Rand Paul It's painfully obvious who is being targeted by the picture ID frenzy, the most vulnerable Americans:
We need to install surveillance cameras and/or moisure detectors in all voting booths to prevent lowlifes from using them as urinals, and thereby discouraging hygienic Americans from participating in the democratic process. Hey! Just because I can't prove it's happening doesn't mean it couldn't happen!
You mean the report that is proven to be mostly BS? The Report that quotes Assistant Attorney General Richard Head? It should be a major clue when Dick Head is your source.....
Nope YOUR report stop lying about it. - - - Updated - - - We know you support the ability to commit voter fraud no need to engage in specious nonsense about it.
As I said your support it happening. How do you catch the person after the fact eh? It is one of many that altogether help protect the integrity of our voting system which you oppose doing. And that the problem exist has been proven over and over so stop with the specious denials. Red herring there is none. It does not make it hard to vote. It's not a either/or thing why do you dishonestly present it as such? Why do you think I care what Paul Rand things about it? And here is what he actually said "There was a time in our history when the vote was suppressed. Actually, it was mostly by Democrats back then. But for some reason, [many Americans] think Republicans are a part of this historical suppression of the African-American vote. They think this is just another ploy. So that is the perception. I dont think that is the truth at all. But because it is perceived that way, we need to be aware of peoples feelings." http://blog.heritage.org/2014/05/16/rand-paul-really-saying-voter-id/ It is painfully obvious you have to assign bogus motives to people because you can support your position otherwise. Voter ID is a rational common sense measure to help insure the integrity of our voting system and there is NO rational or logical reason to oppose it. The ONLY reason to oppose it is to keep allowing for fraudulent votes as has been demonstrated.
There is no voter fraud other than voters listing addresses that might not comply with local residency rules in order to vote locally. This is an issue that is totally fabricated by right wingers for no other reason than to suppress the vote and give ammunition to the anti-immigrant crowd.
How about that rumour that, in Kingman AZ in 2012, 37 voters in a row all flashed their brand new identity cards at the poll nanny, and she failed to note that none bore more than the slightest of resemblances to the identical little portraiture on all of them, purchased a block away at Irving the Imagemaker's 5 Minute Credential Emporium? Whilst stopped for a couple of hours at her favourite STOP sign - "Well, it still says 'STOP!', doesn't it?" - octogenarian Gladys Dunkle shrugged and commented to FoxNews, "Is that why they pay me the big bucks? White folks all look alike to me, and who am I to judge by appearances, anyway?" .
