26 Mar 14
Originally posted by no1marauderThis argument does not hinge on a state being frozen. I was hoping to be concise and have people understand.
I care that someone's fundamental rights are being violated.
I know you don't because in these cases it helps the chance that people who's political ideology you support will be elected.
The idea that particular States are frozen in their voting patterns is absurd. Vermont used to be a reliable conservative state, now it ...[text shortened]... m, no foul is about as cynical and destructive of an idea towards democracy that I can think of.
Texas is red. If a few people don't care enough to vote, WHO CARES? But if Texas starts shifting toward blue, then their role in my hypothetical example changes. I used names like "Utah", "California" and "Texas" to be concise. I'm not going to rewrite everything to say "some hypothetical state that is solidly red in our hypothetical election."
And I'd say passing a law and giving the president dictatorial power to grant exemptions to those he favors is a lot more destructive of democracy than making sure elections are fair.
They recently moved my polling place. I can whine about it being harder and claiming I was "disenfranchised", or I can drive a little further. It depends on whether I care to vote. And since I'm a white male, I doubt anyone is going to treat me like a baby if I won't expend a little more effort to vote.
If the only important thing is making sure everyone votes, why require any voter registration? Why even require people to state their name? Why not just let any warm (or cold) body that enters a polling place vote? Wouldn't be fair, but at least no one would be "disenfranchised".
26 Mar 14
Originally posted by techsouth"Why not just let any warm (or cold) body that enters a polling place vote? Wouldn't be fair, but at least no one would be "disenfranchised"."
This argument does not hinge on a state being frozen. I was hoping to be concise and have people understand.
Texas is red. If a few people don't care enough to vote, WHO CARES? But if Texas starts shifting toward blue, then their role in my hypothetical example changes. I used names like "Utah", "California" and "Texas" to be concise. I'm not going ...[text shortened]... enters a polling place vote? Wouldn't be fair, but at least no one would be "disenfranchised".
That's the way some one party precincts operate. And often the "warm" bodies are transported in large buses from precinct to precinct so they can vote multiple times, as dead persons, pets, or absent seniors who can't get out. The multiple voting disenfranchises every voter who abides by the one vote for one person rule.
26 Mar 14
Originally posted by techsouthYour point on motives is very true. I never bothered to vote in Detroit city elections, because it is a one party city, and my vote was meaningless.
I was just thinking, if an election is decided by 100,000 votes, who cares if a few thousand people choose not to get a picture ID to vote? And I imagine election scrutiny need not be extensive.
But if the election hinges on a few thousand votes a couple of things happen.
1. The incentive to cheat increases.
2. The incentive to vote increases.
A ...[text shortened]... he only reason you'd be against that is if you plan on being one of the ones doing the cheating.
26 Mar 14
Originally posted by normbenignStories like this help explain why Dems are so eager to keep voting periods several weeks long and not require picture IDs.
"Why not just let any warm (or cold) body that enters a polling place vote? Wouldn't be fair, but at least no one would be "disenfranchised"."
That's the way some one party precincts operate. And often the "warm" bodies are transported in large buses from precinct to precinct so they can vote multiple times, as dead persons, pets, or absent seniors wh ...[text shortened]... The multiple voting disenfranchises every voter who abides by the one vote for one person rule.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/wisconsin-homeless-reportedly-given-free-cigarettes-gore-votes
26 Mar 14
Originally posted by techsouthWhy not support moving election day from Tuesday to Saturday, so that more working people can vote without taking time from work?
Stories like this help explain why Dems are so eager to keep voting periods several weeks long and not require picture IDs.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/wisconsin-homeless-reportedly-given-free-cigarettes-gore-votes
Or how about moving election day from November to April, closer to tax day? The notion of easier, probably doesn't actually make for greater participation.
27 Mar 14
3 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderSnowden is a hero. A hero who, by the day and with each revelation - of NSA abuse of power, of IRS abuse of power, of government excess, of another small town purchasing an armored assault vehicle to patrol a pumpkin festival, of executive overreach, of the "let them eat cake" mentality held by so-called public servants large and small, and other aberrations too numerous to completely list here - merits a taller bronze statue with greater pride of place in more American cities. The first one should go in Philadelphia, America's cradle of liberty, as a reminder of the sacrifices made and risks taken by this nation's founders, to create a limited government, of, by, and for the people, that exists to protect and preserve, not to take away, individual rights.
The person the article is referring to was prosecuted. But 5 years in prison is an absurd sentence for the crime of voting in place of your sister in a coma. It's illegal, but doesn't deserve a prison sentence usually reserved for violent felons.
Snowden broke the law; what sentence do you think he should get?
Personally, I would have loved to see a trial, back in the day when a trial was possible, in the sense that evidence would have been required to be presented, in public, for all to see. But, given the very wide latitude the judicial branch has given the executive branch regarding the withholding of classified information, the truth would never have come out, and Snowden would have never gotten the fair and speedy trial he is constitutionally guaranteed. Snowden's great sin was to lift the lid on the rotting stench that ObamaBush, the intelligence community, and the inhabitants of the federal ivory tower have made out of Liberty.
But let's perform the thought experiment anyway. Snowden goes to trial - for treason, for espionage, for unauthorized disclosure of classified information, whatever. Broadcast live and in color on every major network, with Greta, Wolfie, Nancy, Robbie K, and the rest of the usual suspects parsing the meaning of every 'a', 'an', 'the', 'may' and 'shall' in every piece of paper Snowden ever signed, 24/7. What would the odds have been that one insightful, patriotic soul would have seen through the government's demonizations of Snowden and shrieking exhortations that National Security had been permanently, irreparably, irretrievably harmed, and Al Qaida itself was at this very moment planting some very large and nasty stinks and bangs on the White House lawn because of the disclosure of this program or that, and very soon we would all be needing to live on the moon because they just can't sell chocolate bars in Washington, DC anymore - what would the odds have been that maybe one juror said to themselves, "Self, I am not going to convict young Master Snowden of a crime, on this or any other day, because what the gummint is calling a crime was actually a great service to the American people"? Wouldn't that have been interesting?
02 Apr 14
1 edit
http://ncgop.org/ncgop-statement-evidence-massive-voter-fraud-north-carolina/
Likely 35,000 or so voted in NC and another state. That only counts the 28 states that compared information.
Edit: I should point out that Obama took NC by 14000 or so votes in 2008.
No wonder democrats are so opposed to voter reform.
02 Apr 14
1 edit
Originally posted by techsouthLMAO! From the North Carolina GOP article:
http://ncgop.org/ncgop-statement-evidence-massive-voter-fraud-north-carolina/
Likely 35,000 or so voted in NC and another state. That only counts the 28 states that compared information.
No wonder democrats are so opposed to voter reform.
According to the report, the 35,750 figure is the number of “voters with the same first and last name and DOB were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in both states in the 2012 general election.”
There's about 300 million people in the country; I wonder how many John Browns or Mary Smiths have the same date of birth.
That's beyond stupid; thanks for sharing.
BTW, how would have Voter ID laws prevented someone from voting in two different States anyway?
02 Apr 14
Originally posted by no1marauderI think the DOB would count year.
LMAO! From the North Carolina GOP article:
According to the report, the 35,750 figure is the number of “voters with the same first and last name and DOB were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in both states in the 2012 general election.”
There's about 300 million people in the country; I wonder how many John Browns ...[text shortened]... e of birth (1 out of 365 on average).
That's beyond stupid; thanks for sharing.
And if there is a Mary Smith in Texas and a Mary Smith in Virgina with the same DOB, they would not matter. One of them would have to be in NC, be registered to vote, and have voted.
Likely a percentage of the 35,750 are false positives, but it seems likely that most of them are not.
And what is really telling is how quick you are to dismiss evidence. You're mind is clearly made up.
02 Apr 14
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderChances are the person votes in one state and has a friend vote for him in another state. If they had to show a picture ID, they'd have to at least match the picture.
BTW, how would have Voter ID laws prevented someone from voting in two different States anyway?
I have lived in two different states. Shortly after moving, there would have bee ...[text shortened]... m voting in my place in my old state. With voter ID, I'd have to find a friend that looked like me.
02 Apr 14
Originally posted by techsouthPerhaps, the article did not make that clear. I did edit.
I think the DOB would count year.
And if there is a Mary Smith in Texas and a Mary Smith in Virgina with the same DOB, they would not matter. One of them would have to be in NC, be registered to vote, and have voted.
Likely a percentage of the 35,750 are false positives, but it seems likely that most of them are not.
And what is really telling is how quick you are to dismiss evidence. You're mind is clearly made up.
They found about 700 that were exact matches of first name, last name, DOB and last 4 digits of Social Security numbers. That's out of more than 4.5 million votes cast.
02 Apr 14
Originally posted by techsouthAnd BTW: just spotted this other article:
I think the DOB would count year.
And if there is a Mary Smith in Texas and a Mary Smith in Virgina with the same DOB, they would not matter. One of them would have to be in NC, be registered to vote, and have voted.
Likely a percentage of the 35,750 are false positives, but it seems likely that most of them are not.
And what is really telling is how quick you are to dismiss evidence. You're mind is clearly made up.
http://voterintegrityproject.com/nc_vote_fraud_confirmed/
Apparently, of those 35,000,
765 of them had the same last four digits of SSN.
02 Apr 14
Originally posted by techsouthLMAO!
Chances are the person votes in one state and has a friend vote for him in another state. If they had to show a picture ID, they'd have to at least match the picture.
I have lived in two different states. Shortly after moving, there would have bee m voting in my place in my old state. With voter ID, I'd have to find a friend that looked like me.
How many actual cases has it been proven such an unlikely event happened?
I'd posit in the very few cases where it occurred, the votes weren't cast in person but by absentee ballot and the voter simply forgot he had already voted or thought he was allowed to vote in both States (some people are that dumb).
02 Apr 14
Originally posted by techsouthThis is what it says:
And BTW: just spotted this other article:
http://voterintegrityproject.com/nc_vote_fraud_confirmed/
Apparently, of those 35,000,
765 of them had the same last four digits of SSN.
765 voters exact match of first and last name, DOB
and last four of SSN---registered in NC and another
state and voted in NC and the other state in 2012
general election.
 35,750 voters with first and last name and DOB
match that are registered in NC and another state
and voted in both in 2012 general election.
http://voterintegrityproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/JointCommittee_April-2014.pdf p. 35
We know what an "exact match" is? What is a "match"?
02 Apr 14
Originally posted by techsouthBut the same materials, produced by the Kansas Secretary of State’s Office, candidly acknowledge that many of those potential duplicates are false positives: “Experience in the crosscheck program indicates that a significant number of apparent double votes are false positives and not double votes. Many are the result of errors voters sign the wrong line in the poll book, election clerks scan the wrong line with a barcode scanner, or there is confusion over the father/son voters (Sr. and Jr.).” The program thus flags a huge number of voters as potential duplicates, but admits a high error rate, elevating the ACLU’s concerns about how precisely Pennsylvania will handle voter-registration cancellations.
And BTW: just spotted this other article:
http://voterintegrityproject.com/nc_vote_fraud_confirmed/
Apparently, of those 35,000,
765 of them had the same last four digits of SSN.
http://blog.aclupa.org/2014/03/25/questions-surround-new-program-for-purging-pennsylvanias-voter-rolls/