Half Moon Bay Review
 
 
 
 
 
TalkAbout Start a topic Login Create Login Forgot Password  
All Categories Around Town Elections Entertainment/Dining Schools
City Council Environment Sports Beyond the Coastside Catch All
Clay Lambert's Blog Mark Foyer's Blog Stacy Trevenon's blog Mark Noack's blog Bill Murray's Blog

Yes, There Is Voter Fraud

These numbers from North Carolina are certainly big enough to sway an election: Web Link

And then we had the sweet old lady that was an election officer in Ohio that admitted to voting for Obama several times in 2012. (She just got out of jail.)

Voting twice is one of the easier types of voter fraud to detect, and voter ID wouldn't help much in that regard. By far the most difficult type of voter fraud to detect is when people vote under another person's name. Once that fraudulent vote is cast it is very difficult if not impossible to detect.

So what's that nonsense about state-provided voter ID disenfranchising voters? Seems to me that voter fraud disenfranchises not simply eligible voters, but those that actually get off their duff and voted.


Comments

Almost every change in registration and election laws adopted in the last few decades was designed to make voter fraud easier, and succeed in that.

More such changes are on the horizon.

Within a decade or two, votes will be meaningless.


Yes, and..........

Web Link


After examining their "initial findings", here is what we the final actions of The North Carolina Board of Elections:

"One of the more compelling arguments for voter identification is the suppression of voter fraud. But for North Carolina, the number of cases of voter fraud reported by the state Board of Elections is minimal. In 2012, nearly 7 million ballots were cast in the general and two primary elections. Of those 6,947,317 ballots, the state Board of Elections said 121 alleged cases of voter fraud were referred to the appropriate district attorney’s office. That means of the nearly 7 million votes cast, voter fraud accounted for 0.00174 percent of the ballots. Looking back at the 2010 election cycle — which was not a presidential year — 3.79 million ballots were cast and only 28 cases of voter fraud were turned over to the appropriate DA’s office. So in 2010, voter fraud accounted for 0.000738 percent of ballots cast."

Web Link


the Voting News is an arm of the liberal media. PJ News however, that is the real stuff BB. Fox News...balanced real coverage. MSNBC....LGBT propaganda. Pay Attention!!!!


Yes Frank they look pretty far left to me. Wanting all to vote and all votes to be counted. Far Far Left

Web Link


still certain the Bogeyman is real BB


And Frank, don't go knocking The PJ Tatler. They do some funny stuff.

I think it is supposed to be funny

Web Link


>>Looking back at the 2010 election cycle — which was not a presidential year — 3.79 million ballots were cast and only 28 cases of voter fraud were turned over to the appropriate DA’s office. <<

Those are only the cases that were discovered and then turned over.

It is NOT the number of cases of voter fraud. Let's get real.


You may well be correct Uffish.

Remember, the election board had all the data that the OP posted in his article before they said that there were potentially 121.

So, if you say that 121 is the wrong number, what is the right number?


3,141,592


The initial findings linked in the OP are newer than the report linked by Boney Bills and wholesomely endorsed by Frank J.

Not that they care a whit about voter fraud. In fact, I think they support it.


Here's another one who doesn't believe in one-person:one-vote.

Web Link


not in favor of voter fraud

not in favor of disenfranchising blocks of voters for political gain

not in favor of fdrouillard


According to the data supplied by the OP, there were 36,500 cases of POTENTIAL double voting discovered by the North Carolina Voting Commission. Two years after the 2012 election they have referred 121 for prosecution. Does that make sense to anyone?

Perhaps it's the North Carolina Voting Commission who is not concerned with voter fraud.


"lovethefog" as obnoxious as that jerk and his philosophy are, his ideas are quite similar to the voting rights in America following the establishment of our Constitution. While the Constitution does not directly address who can vote, State voting requirements were that only white males who owned at least 50acres of land, and paid taxes were eligible to vote.

As the old song says We've Come A Long Way Baby


It is well established that hiding one's head in the sand rarely if ever accomplishes anything.

To argue that few people are caught and brought to justice for voter fraud is to hide one's head in the sand.

That some argue for laws and procedures that enable fraud and accomplish nothing else has always puzzled me.

To not require IDs at the polls because that might inconvenience some occasionally is, of course, absurd.

Voting on on line is on the horizon. When it arrives full blown, votes will have lost their meaning and usefulness.

-


^^^ Here's another one who doesn't believe in one-person:one-vote. ^^^

And?

^^^ not in favor of disenfranchising blocks of voters for political gain ^^^

Requiring photo ID to vote does not disenfranchise voters -- that is hysterical over-the-top hyperbole by folks that approve of voter fraud, but won't admit it. Turning a blind eye to voter fraud does disenfranchises those that vote legally.

The most pernicious form of voter fraud is easily prevented by requiring photo ID before voting.

^^^ not in favor of fdrouillard ^^^

Is that ad hominem attack supposed to trouble me in some way?


This discussion started by claiming that there was proof of large scale voter fraud in North Carolina. The statistics produced indicated that that point was not verified by the actions of the North Carolina Voting Commission.

Even if there were thousands and thousands of people who registered and voted in two states, how would voter ID change that result. The most likely people to be "double registered" would be college students who registered at home and again at school. Schools such as Duke could well be such a source. The college would have their college IDs for voting in North Carolina and their home state drivers license for voting at home.

I never did trust Dukies!


I've heard the argument before for disallowing the right to vote if you live off public funds. The argument says that over time, those living off the public trough will vote themselves more and more money with more and more voters taking advantage of it.

Eventually the freeloader voters reach a critical mass and the system is swamped and cannot recover. Not enough willing workers any more.

I wonder if it's reached that point yet but we're heading there.


^^^ This discussion started by claiming that there was proof of large scale voter fraud in North Carolina. The statistics produced indicated that that point was not verified by the actions of the North Carolina Voting Commission. ^^^

As I pointed out earlier, the article that BB relies on as proof that voter fraud in NC is insignificant is older that the article that I linked. And that is but one example from one state, and it is a type of voter fraud that can be detected. There is a more insidious version or voter fraud much preferred by the likes of BB and Frank J., one that is easily prevented with photo ID.

I note they have yet to provide a single case of a voter that has been disenfranchised because of photo ID requirements. I note they continue to deny that voter fraud exists, even though common sense tells you it could be a problem and there are numerous examples to show that it is a problem.

They pretend to be against voter fraud while arguing for an environment in which it can thrive.


OK, lets luck at the most updated information from the Associated Press a few hours ago.

"Elections Director Kim Strach told state lawmakers at an oversight hearing Wednesday that her staff has identified 765 registered North Carolina voters whose first names, last names, birthdates and last four digits of their Social Security numbers appear to match information for voters in another state.

Each case will now require further investigation to determine whether voter fraud occurred."

Now to the Big Numbers:

"The cross-check found listings for 35,570 North Carolina voters whose first names, last names and dates of birth match those of voters who voted in other states. However, in those cases middle names and Social Security numbers were not matched."

The fact that the data supplied by the OP did not mention that the middle names and social security number did not match is interesting.

"The analysis also found 155,692 registered North Carolina voters whose information matched voters registered in other states but who most recently registered or voted elsewhere. Strach said those were most likely voters who moved out of state without notifying their local boards of elections."

The fact that the data supplied by the OP did not mention that the Director of Elections Strach (a Republican Appointee) said that these were people who moved out of North Carolina. Web Link

So we have a total of 765 real potential problems. And I'll bet they are all those damn Dukies.


Remember how just a few years ago our poll workers insisted you sign in using their pencil?

Uhhh... NO WAY.

They said it's non-erasable and we need it to copy into something. BS, I signed in ink anyway over their objections.

Next time I came armed with a nice big gummy art eraser. They made the same claims about the erasable pencil so I erased it completely. Proved they were full of it.

Their response? "It takes a awhile to set."


Maybe Boney Bills should just cut to the chase and say how much and what kind of voter fraud he finds acceptable. He's certainly not going to lift a finger to fight it.


BB do you consider 765 "real potential problems" enough of a problem to require protections? If so, what?


Ha... same thought, lol.


A difficult form of voter fraud to detect: Web Link

Note how the elections officials attacked the agents that discovered the fraud, something I'm sure that Boney Bills and Frank J. would admire.


That is serious! Both in terms of ease of committing voter fraud and also for how the Elections board retaliates against investigators exposing their weakness (corruption?).


Francis, neither you nor I can do anything on a grand scale to eliminate voter fraud. While you accused me of supporting voter fraud ("The initial findings linked in the OP are newer than the report linked by Boney Bills and wholesomely endorsed by Frank J.

Not that they care a whit about voter fraud. In fact, I think they support it. fdrouillard") if something came into my purview I would most certainly report it. I simply am not convinced that by shortening early election days and demanding a picture ID is going to impact whatever amount of voter fraud is going on. I do note that Republican officials have gloated that these changes would bring Republican victory.

I also oppose cutting significant points from a story to fit the sources political goals as the source you used did.


"BB do you consider 765 "real potential problems" enough of a problem to require protections? If so, what?"

I think it is a real, serious problem. The first step that should be taken is full prosecution of those involved. Like most crimes, prevention is difficult and fear of certain punishment is the only real deterrent. I don't think that shortening early voting and reducing the number of polling locations is a deterrent. I am ambivalent about picture IDs. If a majority of the voter fraud can be eliminated without disenfranchising people, I am all for it. As of right now, I am not certain that is the truth.


^^^ Francis, neither you nor I can do anything on a grand scale to eliminate voter fraud. ^^^

Yes, you can.

You can support laws that require photo ID in order vote. That will eliminate most of the most difficult forms of voter fraud. You can even limit your support to those laws that require states to provide photo voter ID for free.

You can also support a constitutional amendment that requires photo ID to vote.


Here is a summary of the voting requirements of all states. Note that 33 states already have a photo ID requirement. Studies have reached contradictory conclusions as to whether these laws negatively effect poor and minority voter turn out.

Web Link(United_States)

Not from the above article, but there have been reports that the Democrats are using these Photo ID laws are an attempt to reduce minority voting to spark interest in the minorities to get picture ID and vote just to spite the laws. If the Democrats are not doing it, they should.

All in all, it looks to me like it is having no effect - which is good, especially if it reduces voter fraud.


I don't know what happened, but here is the correct link Web Link


It is NOT the number of cases of voter fraud. Let's get real.

This hand-wringing re. alleged voter fraud all rely on scant data and amount to what my dear old misguided father always says:

"The absence of proof is not the proof of absence!"

Well, yes it is. It is exactly the proof of absence. That's what the absence of proof is.

Just another boogeyman, as Frank J stated earlier.


When people know they can vote multiple times with impunity, that's a problem that should be corrected, not scoffed at. Impunity is the right word for a 97% success rate.


"No need for voters any more

Now that the Supreme Court has officially declared the death of democracy in the United States, why don't we just dispense with the time, aggravation and expense of electing a president every four years and have Sheldon Adelson, the Koch Brothers and Rupert Murdoch select who they want to elevate to that office?"

This was a reader letter in SF Chronicle for 4/3/14


^^^ This was a reader letter in SF Chronicle for 4/3/14 ^^^

And? What? Do you support that? Do you want the US to become an oligarchy? Or are you just telling us that the sky is blue and the sun rises in the east?

^^^ Just another boogeyman, as Frank J stated earlier. ^^^

I know of several cases of actual voter fraud. I don't know of any actual cases of "disenfranchisement" due to the requirement to have photo ID in order to vote.

You need photo ID when you drive, when you go to the bank, when you cash a check or when you go to a terminal. You need to produce photo ID when requested by a cop. So why, on election day, is carrying photo ID such a burden?

Seems to me that "disenfranchising voters" by requiring photo ID is another big Democrat lie, or bogeyman if you will.


>>Like most crimes, prevention is difficult and fear of certain punishment is the only real deterrent.<< - - - - - True. If folk want to do something that is forbidden and are pretty sure that nothing will happen to them if they do it, there is a good chance that they will do it. Everybody knows that. Election "reforms" for some time now have been designed to make fraud easier and less likely to be detected.

To believe or argue that requiring a photo ID at the polls will disenfranchise some folk is as preposterous as any belief or argument could be. I could explain, but why - it is obvious to any thinking person. Further, it would not change any minds or accomplish anything. Dedicated folk have proven time after time that truth or logic will not sway them.

-


I'm supposed to believe these poor voters don't have an ID to vote even though they have enough ID for government checks. Really!

And on that flimsy bit of libberish fantasy we're supposed to let the foundation of democracy be hijacked.


The foundation of democracy has already been hijacked by the Supreme Court. Whether the little people have ID cards or not is not the problem. It is that the government is for sale to the highest bidder and arguing about ID cards is small potatoes over what is really happening in American elections. It's a diversion on what really needs to be fixed.


Well, some prominent Republicans believe voter ID will create Republican Victories. Here is what Pennsylvania GOP House Majority Leader Mike Turzai had to say:

Web Link

Here is what GOP Chairman had to say about the effects of Voter ID

Web Link

What is not being discussed here is that accompanying the Voter ID laws in many states is the closing of polling stations in many black communities and reducing the number of early voting days combined with not having early voting days on weekends.

The combination of those efforts leads some to question the motives and intentions of those laws.

It is comforting to see that Barnus, Uffish, and fdruillard are certain that their is no intent to limit voting in these measures. I will be able to rest much better knowing that.


"I'm supposed to believe these poor voters don't have an ID to vote even though they have enough ID for government checks. Really!"

Nope uffish, you can believe anything you want. This is America.

However, here are some statistics that might influence your "beliefs"

"Studies show that as many as 11 percent of eligible voters do not have government-issued photo ID. That percentage is even higher for seniors, people of color, people with disabilities, low-income voters, and students. Many citizens find it hard to get government photo IDs, because the underlying documentation like birth certificates (the ID one needs to get ID) is often difficult or expensive to come by." Web Link

Here is some information from a University of Washington Study on the effects of voter identification laws in Indiana:

"When we only focus on likely voters,

those who consistently voted in 2002, 2004, and 2006, a 6-point

gap between blacks and whites is still evident. Thus, if the

Indiana law is applied strictly to the letter of the law, about

14% of likely white voters could be turned away from the

polls and over 20% of likely black voters could be turned away"

Web Link

From that same study, here are some statistics on having a valid picture ID:

Access to Valid Photo Identification among Citizen

Adult Population

DRIVER’S LICENSE

CURRENT DL OR

STATE ID CARD VALID ID + FULL NAME

All Eligible Adults8 77.5 83.9 81.1 ~n = 735!

White Eligible Adults 81.4 86.4 83.2 ~n = 590!

Black Eligible Adults 55.2*** 73.4*** 71.7** ~n = 445!

Reading the study might be of value and interest to some.


>>the closing of polling stations in many black communities and reducing the number of early voting days combined with not having early voting days on weekends.<<

Those are entirely different issues.

The claim that the requiring of ID at the polls is suspect because the rule is sometimes found among rules that are suspect makes as much sense as claiming that murders committed by blacks is unfair because blacks, proportionally, commit more murders and thus are being singled out.


And yet our President has had ID for years.


Politicians who vote for wars (Iraq) kill more people than anybody and they all have ID cards.


So how did Obama actually get an ID when he never had a birth certificate* until a couple of years ago?

I'm seriously asking. What's different about him than others who don't have one?

* He never did find one.

He finally produced a "certificate of live birth" which sounds more like veterinarian livestock paperwork....


Worse yet.

Voters like these -Coasters, BoneyBills, & Mike Gaynes- ignore their own party members.

Memory of convenience.

The year of 1974 and Janet Reno's legal proclamations.

A review of James M. Collier & Kenneth F. Collier's, "Votescam: The Stealing of America", is in order.

Despite this -Coasters- remonstrations, vote fraud is alive and well. No matter its cause: electronic voting machines, voter ID, or mail-in ballots.

Tootles!


It is amazing that folks here "know" that there is significant voter fraud and yet nationwide there is little or no prosecution.

How do you folks get all this information? Are the prosecutors in on the fix? Are the fraudulent votes all for one party or are they evenly split? Have any of you reported these violations to your local sheriff?

Inquiring minds want to know.


Jim Collier is another interesting guy. He claims Senator John McCain is a traitor and the League of Women voters conspires to fix elections and computer programmers are controlling all elections.

You can see him in action here. Web Link


Web Link


The Troll stated,

Despite this -Coasters- remonstrations, vote fraud is alive and well. No matter its cause: electronic voting machines, voter ID, or mail-in ballots.

This Coasters says this -TrollTracker- needs proof, she does.


^^^ However, here are some statistics that might influence your "beliefs" ^^^

Looks like "lying with statistics" to me. Or another insidious Pliven and Cloward masterpiece.

The authors of that propaganda those studies may have been more convincing had they identifies some actual "victims" of voter ID laws. They did not, even though they claim that 1 in 9 eligible voters is a potential victim of those laws.

^^^ This Coasters says this -TrollTracker- needs proof, she does. ^^^

Although no one here has yet provided any evidence of any person being a victim of "voter ID" laws, there is evidence of actual voter fraud, some of which could easily be prevented with the requirement to show photo ID in order to vote: Web Link

Like the article says, some choose to ignore it anyway and continue to deny that it exists.


No one, to my knowledge, has denied that voter fraud exists. The question some have is whether the actions being taken are "over-kill"and disenfranchising some citizens. Here is a report from Ohio:

"Existing studies are incomplete but provide some insight. For example, a statewide survey of each of Ohio’s eighty-eight county Boards of Elections found only four instances of ineligible persons attempting to vote out of a total of 9,078,728 votes cast in the state’s 2002 and 2004 general elections. This is a fraud rate of 0.000044%.’ The Carter-Baker Commission’s Report noted that since October 2002, federal officials had charged eighty-nine individuals with casting multiple votes, providing false information about their felon status, buying votes, submitting false voter registration information, or voting improperly as a noncitizen. Examined in the context of the 196,139,871 ballots cast between October 2002 and August 2005, this represents a fraud rate of 0.000045% (and note also that not all of the activities charged would have been prevented by a photo- identification requirement)"

I am certain that all violators were not caught, nor regardless of the number of laws passed, will they ever be.

The thinking here seems to be that one party is the beneficiary of these fraudulent votes. My bet is that they are pretty equally divided between the two parties.

Some folks here refuse to accept any statistics which do not substantiate their position yet refuse to produce anything that supports their position. I guess we are just supposed to take their words as fact.


Here is the most recent study of Ohio voter fraud issued by the Republican Secretary of State following the 2012 election. Surely, we know that a republican would not mess with the numbers.

Web Link


^^^ The thinking here seems to be that one party is the beneficiary of these fraudulent votes. My bet is that they are pretty equally divided between the two parties. ^^^

You don't get it, do you? It's not about which party benefits or which party doesn't. It's about maintaining the integrity of the vote and public confidence in that institution.

It wasn't all that long ago that Democrats were howling about voter fraud. My how things change once they see a lack of advantage for conservatives or an advantage for Democrats. Now, to them, the amount of voter fraud is inconsequential and should be tolerated because we can't stomp it out all together.

They just let one Ohio poll worker out of jail early. She was convicted of voting for Obama 6 times in the 2012 election.

A poll worker. And a Democrat. I'm sure she took the position that voter fraud was insignificant, too.


"They just let one Ohio poll worker out of jail early. She was convicted of voting for Obama 6 times in the 2012 election"

Perhaps I should explain my position once again. Voter fraud, vote manipulation, or whatever are serious crimes. They should be prosecuted and letting this woman out of jail after a few months is terrible.

My contention, backed up by every statistic and report that I can find, tells me that the number of times that it occurs is infinitesimal. The fact that you do not provide anything indicates to me that there are no statistics that support your claim of wide spread voter fraud.

And as to this specific case, how would voter IDs have prevented it.


Here is a listing of cases involving voter corruption and voter fraud sate by state in the U.S. Web Link

How many of these would have been prevented by requiring a photo ID?


And whenever you claim that the voter ID laws do not have a political goal, watch this video of the Republican Pennsylvania House leader. Web Link


Oh, you say Obama won Pennsylvania in 2012. Here's the scoop

Web Link


On April 3, 2014 at 11:35 am Boney Bills wrote:

"The cross-check found listings for 35,570 North Carolina voters whose first names, last names and dates of birth match those of voters who voted in other states. However, in those cases middle names and Social Security numbers were not matched."

The fact that the data supplied by the OP did not mention that the middle names and social security number did not match is interesting.

You have misinterpreted the words "were not matched" which I, as a programmer and data analyst, say has a completely different meaning than "did not match". "Were not matched" means they didn't use those data in the comparison.


^^^ there are no statistics that support your claim of wide spread voter fraud. ^^^

There are no posts to support your assertion that I claim voter fraud is wide spread.

What I did say was that people voting under the names of others is very difficult if not impossible to detect. The easiest way to stop it is to implement voter ID laws, which seem to work well without "disenfranchising" voters.

Again, I can point to several cases of actual voter fraud, some of which could have been prevented with voter ID. You have yet to provide one single example of an eligible voter that has actually been a "victim" of voter ID laws, yet that is the excuse that you and others use to fight implementing voter ID laws in California where it is desperately needed.

Vote Aqui!


Here are a few statistics about voter fraud: Web Link

Note the methods used by numerous liberal groups to prevent local election officials from maintaining their voter rolls per federal law.


This might explain why liberals are so ignorant of voter fraud: Web Link

The media don't hype Democrat scandals, even those as serious as gun-running by an advocate of gun control. When they fail to cover the story in PA where 4 black Democrats accepted bribes to vote against voter ID -- and the Democrat AG stopped pursuing the case -- it becomes clearly why liberals remains insistent that voter fraud is rare. Web Link

The potential for voter fraud which such political machines operating in a state is very, very high.


"Watchdog", whether you or I are correct in our interpretation of the statement made by the Secretary of State, the significance is that the original posted article totally ignored that significant statement.

Since all of the record checks were done with Social Security numbers as a criteria, why they would not use them in this case is questionable.

We may be debating the meaning of "is".


Francis, you may be correct that these 4 Democrats took bribes to vote against Voter ID laws, but the article you referenced doesn't mention it.

It appears from the article that these crooks have found a way to weasel out of punishment for their crimes. This is the kind of fraud and corruption that we can agree is all foo prevalent.


To the Oracle of Novato:

"Some things I think are very conservative, or very liberal. I think when someone falls into one category for everything, I'm very suspicious. It doesn't make sense to me that you'd have the same solution to every issue." - Louis CK.


"Again, I can point to several cases of actual voter fraud, some of which could have been prevented with voter ID."

Francis, would you please do so. I think that would support your case.

I have pointed out 2 statistical studies which demonstrated clearly the disenfranchisement of poor and black individuals. I have pointed out Republican Party officials and Republican elected politicians who claim the laws were passed with the intention of reducing the Democratic vote and that it actually did reduce Democratic votes.

Now it is true that I do not have the names of the people who stayed home and did not attempt to vote because they did not have a picture ID, but I will see what I can find.

How many names do you you think would be enough to convince you that Voter ID laws disenfranchise people?


As I said I would, I have found the names of 9 people who were disenfranchised by the voter ID laws. Is nine enough, or should I look for more?

Web Link


In case those are not sufficient, here is a list of 32 individuals and their personal stories of disenfranchisement as a result of voter ID laws.

Web Link


While I support voter id in theory but not in current practice (the devil is in the details), I think that those stories at the links supplied by Boney Bills primarily document that there are a huge number of government employees who should be fired.

For discussion purposes, would those opposing voter id drop their opposition if there were solid laws making it much easier to get a valid id (for free?) And of course any government-issued id should be valid for voting; the fact that VA ids are not accepted just proves the claim that voter id is implemented to dis-enfranchise certain voters. How many people live too far from a post office and are unable to get there? The law could require that post offices issue photo ids. They already take passport photos which I assume means that they are verifying identity.

BTW, how does having a copy of a birth certificate prove that you are the named person?


Watchdog, you make some very valid points. There are millions of Republicans who "know" that President Obama has been using a phony birth certificate for years.

If one could obtain a photo ID without cost, and if college issued photo IDs were accepted, or if the person had been voting at that precinct were excused from the requirement, the laws would be supportable.

Of course if the law made those exceptions, they would not be passed by the Republicans.


^^^ Francis, would you please do so. I think that would support your case. ^^^

Pay attention. Some of the links I've already provided have specific examples of voter fraud. John Fund and "TrueTheVote" have numerous specific examples of the potential for voter fraud as well as actual voter fraud. And you can Google others, which I know you're capable of doing.

I see you've got a few names where "ThinkProgress" and another website dedicated to opposing voter Id claims they have some voters that have been disenfranchised by voter ID laws.

That's what they claim. It may take some more work to determine if it's true or not.

^^^ Of course if the law made those exceptions, they would not be passed by the Republicans. ^^^

You don't know that and you don't speak for Republicans. In fact, Republicans and Tea Party conservatives do support laws in which the state provides photo ID to vote for free. But radical progressives still oppose photo ID laws.


Francis, I reviewed the 13 posts you have made on this thread. I can find none that refer to a specific act of voter fraud that would be detected by the voter ID laws.

When you wrote "Again, I can point to several cases of actual voter fraud, some of which could have been prevented with voter ID." it appears that you had not yet done so.

So once again, I am asking you to please point them out.


^^^ Francis, I reviewed the 13 posts you have made on this thread. I can find none that refer to a specific act of voter fraud that would be detected by the voter ID laws. ^^^

More proof that you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make them drink.

But I'll play along. Do you think that the Democrat poll worker in Ohio would have been allowed to vote six times if voter ID was required? Do you think that whoever voted under the name of that dead woman in Pontiac, MI would have been able to do so with voter ID?

Your "yeah, buts" are unnecessarily tedious and unproductive. I don't think you're serious about voter fraud or efforts to stop it, and I don't think you can be trusted on this important issue.


Our voting method needs to be bullet proof.

Frankly, if Obama and the Democrats cared as much about the overseas military whose ballots were hijacked I might have some sympathy for the issue.

But when they screw over the military and then almost immediately trot out -other- people we're supposed to care more about, they've now proved that it's just another slick Democratic maneuver.


Boney, I just do not understand your position here. Of course there is voter fraud. To think otherwise is to take leave of reality. Of course requiring IDs would help. It is believed to help in a number of other situations. Try cashing a check - at your own bank - without one. I doubt that you believe that the banks are wrong to demand a picture ID. They know that if they are not careful they WILL be taken advantage of.

None of the examples that you cited are examples of disenfranchisement. They are examples of folk who were not willing to do what had to be done to acquire a proper ID or to seek help doing so if needed.

Of Course acquiring an ID will be more bothersome for some than for others. So What? EVERYTHING that has to be done is more bothersome for some than for others.

If the political parties are concerned one way or another about an ID requirement, they can offer help to folk who need help. My guess is that is exactly what is done where ID laws are maintained.

-


Barnus, I'll try to explain my position to you. You might note that at the start of this thread, I was ambivalent about the Voter ID laws. After reviewing numerous articles over the past few days, my position solidified.

I am opposed to any form of voter fraud-or any other form of crime for that matter. I believe, based upon the studies that I have read and the prosecutions that have occurred, that voter fraud is an extremely miniscule problem.

I believe, based on the studies that I have read, the comments of Republican officials, and the experiences of individual voters,that these ALEC written laws not only are written to minimize voter participation, they are actually accomplishing that goals.

Others may look at the same data and arrive at a different conclusion.

They are certainly as welcome to their interpretation which bears no reflection on their motives. I am certain that they will grant me the same consideration.


You can also support a constitutional amendment that requires photo ID to vote.

That won't solve the problem of people using their student ID, proof of circumcision, and out of state drivers licenses.

There needs to be one and only one type of ID that serves as proof. It needs to be the same for everybody. Sort of like a National Voter ID card linked to a database where a list of approved voters is maintained.

I think it is pretty obvious why the Republican party is on this case. Voter suppression.

On the other hand, I don't care. One should have to prove one is eligible to vote. Voting should be done in person. There should be no exceptions except for Military and Diplomatic Personnel stationed overseas. Nobody else should be allowed to vote absentee. Nobody. If you are too sick too bad. Too old, too bad. Don't have transportation, too bad. Work two jobs and both bosses are asses, too bad. Can't afford an ID? Too bad. Stuck in a nursing home, too bad.

We coddle people too much. If one supports the notion that one should produce an ID in order to buy a gun, I don't see how one can be against voter ID.

As we have seen, Student IDs, Military ID, circumcision documents, Drivers Licenses, and other ID can be used to game the system. Folks can move out of state in July and vote twice in November.

Here is an example of how one person commited voter fraud in Florida: -- Web Link

The only way I can see of insuring fraud free elections is a National Voter ID that can be used to detect fraudulent voting. In fact, we could then use the National Voter ID card as proof of ID when buying guns.

Unless you agree with me, you are willing to abide voter fraud. The price we will all pay in order to eliminate the risk of even one fraudulent vote is a National Voter ID card and database. Maybe one with biometric date recorded.

Or what we could do, and this is a humdinger, is DNA registration. Think about it. If there was a DNA database of Good to Go Americans, we could eliminate illegal immigration. How you ask? Simple. If your DNA is not registered, you can't buy anything, you can't work, can't apply for benefits, can't fraudulently vote, and can't buy guns if you are not on the Approved DNA list, no can buy. Hell, just the fact they can't buy cigarettes or beer will drive half of them out of the country and vastly reduced the plopping of babies. No beer, no sex, so goes the theory.

There are so many things we could eliminate with a National Voter ID and database. Welfare fraud, tax fraud, voter fraud, spousal fraud, gun fraud, employment fraud, Social Security fraud, Medicare Fraud, and who know what other kind of fraud. How could anybody, and I mean anybody, argue against a National Voter ID and database? Except maybe if you are the kind of person who wants to enable voter fraud, gun fraud, tax fraud, job fraud, welfare fraud, Social Security fraud, and Medicare fraud.

National Voter ID tied to DNA and a database. Yeah, that's the ticket!

What? What's that you say? You don't like the implications of National ID's? You don't much care for the 666 connotations of a DNA database? Are you willing to put up with a little bit of fraud just because you don't want to have your cheek swabbed? A little bit of gun violence is prefered vs a foolproof system of preventing those who society has said can't have guns from obtaining them? Too inconvenient you say? Not fair to you? Ripe for governmental abuse?

Hmmmm. Maybe I should reconsider the price we would all pay vs the actual harm done by those who commit fraud. OK. I'll ponder on it.


"The only way I can see of insuring fraud free elections is a National Voter ID that can be used to detect fraudulent voting."

That will not eliminate the fraud that is perpetrated by election officials, or ballot designers, or computer programmers that are the real source of significant vote fraud. As in this case where one election official can effect hundreds or perhaps thousands of votes. Web Link

And here where in Memphis many registrations were not processed and the voters were not able to vote and 3200 people received the wrong poll notification and their votes were voided

Web Link

and these election officials in Georgia just did not want to cooperate

Web Link

And in Ohio where election officials allegedly did not count or destroyed thousands upon thousands of votes

" In the Cuyahoga case, the poll workers are charged with circumventing state recount laws that require a random sampling of at least three percent of the votes cast in a given precinct, to be recounted by hand and by machine. The prosecution charges that the workers instead hand picked sample precincts to recount that they knew did not have questionable results. Once they were able to match those recounts with official results, they could then do the rest of the recount by machine, in effect rendering the entire process meaningless. "This was a very hush operation," said prosecutor Baxter."

Web Link

And not a word or law about tightening the supervision of elections.

Amaazing


So you think it is cheap and easy to get a Photo ID?

Here is a interactive map that lets you check the requirements in each state. The costs obviously do not include whatever costs are involved in getting the required documents. Texas is quite interesting.

Web Link

Doesn't nearly everybody have a Photo ID?

Wisconsin should be a rather typical state. Here is a pretty exhaustive study done on the State of Wisconsin.

Web Link


The United States argued that the emails could be the only existing candid evidence about the purpose of the legislation because Texas Republicans coordinated their talking points on the bill and refused to publicly engage with the concerns of minority legislators. If any of the emails reveal discriminatory intent, the U.S. will still have to argue to get them admitted as evidence during the trial phase of the lawsuit.

Web Link

Seems like there might be some evidence of collusion to create Voter ID laws that suppress voting. Who knew?


Or, we could just go to the tape. Oh, wait, this is from a different state.

Web Link


How did Obama get an ID when he didn't have a birth certificate?


How did Obama get an ID when he didn't have a birth certificate?

He had a birth certificate. That's how. That's the amazing farce of the birthers. That they all imagined the POTUS, who passed through every single test required to become POTUS, did not have a birth certificate. You all need an ID that says, "Mentally Retarded".


Pretty vicious aren't you for someone who's wrong.

He still does NOT have a birth certificate.

He came up with a "certificate of live birth" but ===> still did not even have -that- until recently. <===

So answer a reasonable question reasonably or S T F U.


It's been answered a thousand times. That answer will never satisfy the racist, ridiculous group of people who can't stand that a man of mixed race is in the White House. For 8 years. 8 Years. LOL.


Anyone? Obama couldn't come up with any documentation until recently, so here's the simple question again (if you don't know then don't respond):

How did Obama get an ID when he didn't have a birth certificate?


My goodness, Uffish, you are going over the edge. There is no doubt President Obama was able to vote. If you choose to believe that he was born in Africa and it was a lie when he got a Hawaiian birth certificate, that is your right. It has nothing to do with this discussion.

Perhaps you would like to comment on the recent posts or present some new data on the subject at hand.


People say Voter ID laws are unfair to people without a birth certificate.

Well the prime example of someone who couldn't find a birth certificate is Obama so how did he get an ID? It's a fair question.


PS to the rabid tunnel vision Coasters: take your racist cr@p and shove it. I wrote in a black candidate in 2008. Not even half white.


Uffish, there is no doubt that you are a wonderful human being, Coasters is an oaf, and that President Obama was born in Africa.

Now, can we get back on topic?


Coasters is an oaf, I don't know about Obama. That's not the point.

We ARE on topic because people claim Voter ID laws require a birth certificate (or certificate of live birth... whatever)

How was Obama able to get ID without that when others say they can't? Whatever he did, can't they do the same thing?


Obama is in cahoots with Satan. The devil gave him a birth certificate and convinced the Hawaiian officials to lie. Obama promised to destroy America, turn America over to the Communists, start a war on Christmas, and pass healthcare reform in return.

I am shocked that you didn't know that.


Can I get a reasonable answer? If it's so simple just humor me and tell me.

How was Obama able to get ID without a locating birth certificate when others say they can't? Whatever he did, can't they do the same thing?


Uffish, you start with an idiotic assumption that President Obama didn't have a birth certificate and then expect people to take you seriously.

Ask Orly Taitz or some other birther nut for your answers.


So call me names when you can't come up with an answer. Nice work BB.

Anyone else up for explaining why Obama could get an ID without locating his birth certificate, but Voter ID "victims" can't?


It is too obvious and extremely tedious but I'll make it even clearer for this group:

Regardless of your views on Obama's eligibility, HE FAMOUSLY COULDN'T FIND HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. If he could not locate it how did he ever get ID?

I don't care if he was born in Toad Suck, Arkansas. HE COULDN'T FIND HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. So how did he get ID?

He did. Why can't other voters?


It is too obvious and extremely tedious but I'll make it even clearer for this group:

Regardless of your views on Obama's eligibility, HE FAMOUSLY COULDN'T FIND HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. If he could not locate it how did he ever get ID?

I don't care if he was born in Toad Suck, Arkansas. HE COULDN'T FIND HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. So how did he get ID?

He did. Why can't other voters?


Here is a report from Nate Silver, whose statistical analysis has made him the number one political forecaster in America.

Web Link

His analysis, before the 2012 election told him the Voter Identification laws would have the following effect on the Presidential election:

Pennsylvania 2.4% reduction in turnout 1.4% net swing to Republicans

Kansas 2.4% reduction in turnout 1.4% net swing to Republicans

He adjusted his forecast using those numbers and produced the most accurate forecast of the 2012 Presidential Elections.


When was it that Obama could not find his birth certificate? Not saying that didn't happen but I don't remember that being in the news.

I can't find my birth certificate but I know I can get one at the Department of Whatever back in Land 'O Lakes.

Did not Obama produce one?


BMTHof, you're saying it would take you several years to produce something too? Not likely... you could file a freedom of information request, lol.


Like Romney and his taxes, Obama chose not to release it until well after the election.

You said he could not produce it as if you know he didn't know where it was. I assume you are telling the truth. So, update me. Was there a time when Obama claimed he could not find the certificate?

Just because folks demand Romney and Obama release personal data does not mean they have to. Right? But if Obama said he could not locate one, that would indeed cast suspicion upon him.

Did Obama ever make such a claim?


"According to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands:

Birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth and Certifications of Live Birth) and Certificates of Hawaiian Birth are the primary documents used to determine native Hawaiian qualification.

The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individuals birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person's birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth."

"The Certification of Live Birth is not only just as valid as the Certificate of Live Birth, it is just as much a birth certificate, and is considered prima facie evidence of Hawaiian birth for all legal purposes (as clearly stated at the bottom of the form itself), not only the Hawaiian Home Lands program."

Web Link

"On June 12, 2008, Obama's campaign responded to the rumors by posting an image of Obama's birth certificate on the "Fight The Smears" website.[35][36]

The image is a scan of a laser printed document obtained from and certified by the Hawaii Department of Health on June 6, 2007. It is a "Certification of Live Birth", sometimes referred to as a short form birth certificate, and contains less information than the longer "Certificate of Live Birth", which Hawaii no longer issues.[37][38] Asked about this, Hawaiian Department of Health spokeswoman Janice Okubo explained that Hawaii stopped issuing the longer "Certificate" in 2001 when their birth records were "put into electronic files for consistent reporting", and therefore Hawaii "does not have a short-form or long-form certificate".[39] A "record of live birth", partially handwritten and partially typed, was created and submitted in 1961 when Obama was born, and is "located in a bound volume in a file cabinet on the first floor of the state Department of Health". The document was used to create the state's electronic records, and has been examined by state officials multiple times since the controversy began.[38]

In releasing the certificate, the Obama website declared that the rumors "aren't actually about that piece of paper – they're about manipulating people into thinking Barack is not an American citizen".[

Web Link

This public information has been available since June 12, 2008


Oh I don't know about that Boney. There is a Sheriff in Phoenix who has been on the case and has been on the verge of busting it wide open for almost six years!! -- Web Link

Now I know Sheriff Joe has a thing for criminals in pink panites so I imagine the thought of slapping some pink panties on Obama keeps the old guy up at night.

Sheriff Joe needs your help folks. Liberal/Jewish Hollywood types are trying to defeat him. Send anything you can and help Sheriff Joe protect the people of Arizona from a third term under the Half White Marxist Muslim from Kenya.


Or send money to Orly Taitz. That lady is on the case too: -- Web Link

These guys need your help too: -- Web Link


I think Obama was born in Hawaii but he brought all this suspicion on himself. Why not get your documents in order -first- instead of creating a situation and blaming others for the maelstrom sure to follow? Web Link (yes I'm intentionally showing a right wing article).

Every other candidate is asked for a birth certificate so there's nothing special about Obama. Lay your cards on the table early and don't jack people around. If someone asks just show your paperwork and prevent a mess.

Obama asking Hawaii privately to generate another legal document is plausible. Hence the delay. Hence the supposedly "quick release" of it after he finally "officially" asked for it ("so we can get back to business."). I'm sure you remember this. But it looks bad. And various respected experts question it.

So, did Obama have a birth certificate and then lose it later? How did he get proof for a Drivers License or a Passport, which requires even more proof?

Tell us why we shouldn't be asking. People are all over Alan Alifano for lax performance on documentation. Shouldn't we expect the highest standards from a President?


If you believe that President Obama was born in Hawaii why all this?

Why did you initiate eleven (11) posts on this thread about his birth certificate?


When I requested a certified copy of my birth certificate from the cow town I grew up in Ohio, it looked very similar to the one Obama produced. Only mine was printed on bright blue construction paper like the kids use in elementary school. But it did have an embossed seal from the local health dept so it was legit enough to get a passport.


Well ya got me with the Alifano thing.

Here is something to consider. Once Alifano provided the correct info, the charge of conflict of interest was dropped by all. Alifano explained it and that was that. Except the part about the 9 mistaken checked boxes.

Tell you what. I'll wait for Sheriff Joe's revelations.

Oh and one more thing. Alifano was an adult when he was being lax with his documentation. Obama was just a baby when he was being lax with his birth records.

Now your turn. Did it bother you any that Romney broke with tradition and only released 1 year, (I think it was only 1 year), of tax records?

Personally, I think he didn't want the Mormon elders to find out he wasn't tithing.


You wrongly assume I was making "birther" posts. You would have gotten my point about Obama and his ID if you would accept my posts at face value.


That last was to BB.


Quick, gotta run, but yes, all candidates should release all tax and birth cert records before running. Should be a legal requirement. Hiding things creates suspicion.


That is true says JCU.


If I'm an oaf, you're all...in serious trouble. :-)


Here is an example of why Democrats are leery of actions that restrict voter participation.

The State of Ohio passed legislation limiting voting hours in predominantly Democratic Counties and not in Republican leaning counties.

See for yourself. Web Link


Reminds me of Wisconsin, after instituting voter ID, closing DMV offices or limiting their hours in Democratic-leaning districts while not imposing those limits in Republican-leaning districts.

Web Link

Also, college student ID is not acceptable to vote in Texas, but a gun license is accepted.

Web Link

Can you blame people for questioning the motives of Republicans favoring voter ID laws?


And of course Manatee County where the Republicans eliminated most of the voting locations in minority heavy locations Web Link


Ooooohhhhh! A Republican conspiracy to stop minorities from voting!! OMG!!!!!!

We've been over this before. There were lots of extra voting places made in the attempt to bend over backwards to make sure minorities could easily vote. It became clear it was way too many, unnecessary, and a waste of resources,

But Republicans hating on blacks plays so much better doesn't it?


Uffish, they must have the same problem in Omaha, Nebraska

Web Link's_newest_voter_suppression_trend%3A_close_polling_places,_don't_tell_voters


Let's see if those numbers become more realistic after the next election when photo ID is required to vote: Web Link


Add a comment

Please login to comment on this topic.

Login Here

Create a Login

Powered by Podium