Republican policy fraud

[RandomGuy]

Before the wave of GOP pushed voter ID laws, we were told, "it doesn't solve a problem, and will simply keep some people from legitimately voting".
http://www.npr.org/2012/07/18/156935624/study-many-could-face-obstacles-in-voter-id-laws

http://www.npr.org/2012/01/28/146006217/why-new-photo-id-laws-mean-some-wont-vote


The argument over whether voters should have to present photo identification at the polls usually splits along party lines. Republicans who favor the requirement say it prevents ballot fraud. Democrats and election rights groups who oppose it say it is meant to suppress turnout.

Shockingly enough, depressing voter turnout is exactly what happened.

Study Backs Up What Advocates Predicted: Strict Voter ID Laws Reduce Minority Turnout

http://kut.org/post/study-backs-what-advocates-predicted-strict-voter-id-laws-reduce-minority-turnout

Voter ID laws were supposed to prevent voter fraud, but despite the best efforts of a vast army of conservative copypasta warriors, no one has ever proven the types of fraud that ID laws would curb actually exists.

So either the idiots pushing this expanded government and increased government spending without knowing this, in which case they are idiots, or they knew exactly what they were doing, and it was a cynical, overtly racist, policy solution to keep people from voting, for the SOLE purpose of preventing people who might vote for a different political party from actually voting.

Idiots, or cynical assholes? Which is it?

Personally I think it is the latter, taking advantage of the former.

[Nbadan]

Scary......Voter suppression is what the GOP calls 'the silent majority'

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/02/10/01/3105E47A00000578-3439859-SHIVER_DOWN_HER_SPINE_A_Trump_supporter_gets_her_m essage_across_-a-17_1455066910025.jpg

...at this point....this is the only way they can win....and it's gonna get worse as the South drifts democratic politically...

[boutons_deux]

"drifts democratic politically"

gerrymandering and voter suppression will keep slave and red states red.

[Nbadan]

"drifts democratic politically"

gerrymandering and voter suppression will keep slave and red states red.




Meh...eventually the 'blue' cities are going to overwhelm the rural 'red' vote...

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, when disenfranchisement is your party's policy, I can't support your party.

[johnsmith]

Lol....I've goofed off on this site long enough to have watched this conversation and thread take place every two years for 9 years now. That's pretty funny .

[ChumpDumper]

Only difference is now our board Republicans don't even try to argue MASSIVE VOTE FRAUD anymore.

[boutons_deux]

Only difference is now our board Republicans don't even try to argue MASSIVE VOTE FRAUD anymore.

gerrymandering is irreversible in slave, red states, and Repg SCOTUS gutted VRA. And then there is red, slave state and their vote counting fraud.

[spurraider21]

why dont minorities carry photo id?

[ElNono]

why dont minorities carry photo id?

some reasons in the OP's npr articles...

[Th'Pusher]

why dont minorities carry photo id?

Why is a law requiring an ID to vote necessary?

[johnsmith]

Only difference is now our board Republicans don't even try to argue MASSIVE VOTE FRAUD anymore.

That's true because you and about three other posters are still posting the EXACT same shit in the exact same way you were a decade ago.

Sounds super thrilling!

[boutons_deux]

That's true because you and about three other posters are still posting the EXACT same shit in the exact same way you were a decade ago.

Sounds super thrilling!

... because Repug LIES about massive, election-modifying VOTER FRAUD have been told forever.

Their "super thrilling" voter fraud LIE is a charade to cover for voter suppression.

[RandomGuy]

Lol....I've goofed off on this site long enough to have watched this conversation and thread take place every two years for 9 years now. That's pretty funny .

Eyup. I would agree. This isn't an old conversation.

What is new though, is that there is a bit more evidence to support the statement "this is unfair".

How much evidence do you need before you get angry, or convinced that it was wrong in the first place, if you aren't either.

Or do rank and file Republicans just look the other way while their leaders do something shitty?

That is what I am curious about.

[spurraider21]

Why is a law requiring an ID to vote necessary?
Never said it should be.

[vy65]

There may be a legitimate gripe behind some of the issues raised by the article (needing an ID to get an ID). But some of the excuses -- having to drive far to the DMV, having to wait in line, etc... -- are pathetic.

[baseline bum]

There may be a legitimate gripe behind some of the issues raised by the article (needing an ID to get an ID). But some of the excuses -- having to drive far to the DMV, having to wait in line, etc... -- are pathetic.

If you don't drive, don't fly, and don't leave the country, there's not really much of a reason to have a photo ID. You only need a Social Security card to find legal work.

[vy65]

If you don't drive, don't fly, and don't leave the country, there's not really much of a reason to have a photo ID. You only need a Social Security card to find legal work.

If you have a bank account, if you get detained, if you purchase alcohol, purchase life insurance, take out a mortgage, etc... There are plenty of additional reasons.

[baseline bum]

If you have a bank account, if you get detained, if you purchase alcohol, purchase life insurance, take out a mortgage, etc... There are plenty of additional reasons.

How many poor people do stuff like purchase life insurance or take out a mortgage though? Do you actually ever get carded buying alcohol after age 30? This voter ID crap is designed to chip away a couple percent of votes from the elderly poor and from young voters.

[vy65]

How many poor people do stuff like purchase life insurance or take out a mortgage though? Do you actually ever get carded buying alcohol after age 30? This voter ID crap is designed to chip away a couple percent of votes from the elderly poor and from young voters.

Poor people buy alcohol all the time. And I get carded at liquor stores or gas stations all the time too.

Some of the beef is legitimate and there certainly are ulterior motives.

That being said lots of people don't have IDs who probably should and the excuses proffered by that article are beyond pathetic.

[boutons_deux]

Repug LIE: voter fraud is a huge problem (but Repugs can't offer any evidence, they just make up shit, like Bible humpers)

Truth: voter fraud is not ANY SIZE problem. Repugs have a strategy of LYING to facilitate voter suppression, esp in the slave states where Repug SCOTUS enabled voter suppression by gutting VRA.

[RandomGuy]

There may be a legitimate gripe behind some of the issues raised by the article (needing an ID to get an ID). But some of the excuses -- having to drive far to the DMV, having to wait in line, etc... -- are pathetic.

If one has to work 60-80+ hours a week to support oneself, or simply are too old to drive a car, taking the time/effort is a huge barrier for something that offers little tangible benefits.

Can't say I am surprised you took the chance to shit on poor/old people though. You never fail to fail in the humanity department.

[vy65]

If one has to work 60-80+ hours a week to support oneself, or simply are too old to drive a car, taking the time/effort is a huge barrier for something that offers little tangible benefits.

Can't say I am surprised you took the chance to shit on poor/old people though. You never fail to fail in the humanity department.

If one has to work 60-80 hours (which, btw, is pure speculation on your part especially considering the article referenced those in rural areas), they can still take 4 hours to get an ID once every 6 years.

But more importantly, lol thinking I give a fuck whether you think I'm a good person or not. Who exactly are you to judge?

[vy65]

If one has to work 60-80+ hours a week to support oneself, or simply are too old to drive a car, taking the time/effort is a huge barrier for something that offers little tangible benefits.

Can't say I am surprised you took the chance to shit on poor/old people though. You never fail to fail in the humanity department.

And if these people are so slammed, when are they finding the time to wait in line and vote?

[RandomGuy]

And if these people are so slammed, when are they finding the time to wait in line and vote?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/04/florida-early-voting_n_2073119.html

Kind of part of the point. GOP legislatures have also started cutting back on flexible voting times, so that people whose employers don't give them time off to go vote... can't.

Part and parcel of yet another shitty cynical move to make sure that likely Democratic voters are disenfranchised.

[RandomGuy]

If one has to work 60-80 hours (which, btw, is pure speculation on your part especially considering the article referenced those in rural areas), they can still take 4 hours to get an ID once every 6 years.

But more importantly, lol thinking I give a fuck whether you think I'm a good person or not. Who exactly are you to judge?

Judging people that advocate harm to children is easy. Anybody can do it.

Just walk into the grocery store you shop at, and loudly exclaim:

"I think the children of poor people in this country should be allowed to starve to death".

And see how easily everybody there comes to an appropriate moral judgment.

Human decency is pretty much programmed into us, or most of us. I guess some people can un-learn empathy, and make feeling superior to "other" as more important than empathy.

[boutons_deux]

And if these people are so slammed, when are they finding the time to wait in line and vote?

a lot of people don't vote because Repug have cut back voting stations, esp in black/brown areas, so people have to queue for hours. People can't take off work. and voting should be on a weekday holiday, or moved to Sunday (and Saturday).

Repugs have stopped same-day voter registration, have reduced all kinds of opportunities to vote.

and how do you show your photo ID when your voting by mail?

[Dirk Oneanddoneski]

If South African blacks can do it why can't ours?

http://i.imgur.com/YTCtdat.jpg

[spurraider21]

whats the point of voting if superdelegates are just gna cuck you anyway

thanks democraps!

/boutons

[baseline bum]

whats the point of voting if superdelegates are just gna cuck you anyway

thanks democraps!

/boutons

There's no way Hillary isn't getting the nomination. It's like when everyone decided Iverson was getting MVP the first month of the season.

[spurraider21]

still find it ironic that after all the whining about republican voting agendas, its the democratic nomination that is more rigged than anything

[vy65]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/04/florida-early-voting_n_2073119.html

Kind of part of the point. GOP legislatures have also started cutting back on flexible voting times, so that people whose employers don't give them time off to go vote... can't.

Part and parcel of yet another shitty cynical move to make sure that likely Democratic voters are disenfranchised.

Fascinating but irrelevant to the point being made.

[vy65]

Judging people that advocate harm to children is easy. Anybody can do it.

Just walk into the grocery store you shop at, and loudly exclaim:

"I think the children of poor people in this country should be allowed to starve to death".

And see how easily everybody there comes to an appropriate moral judgment.

Human decency is pretty much programmed into us, or most of us. I guess some people can un-learn empathy, and make feeling superior to "other" as more important than empathy.

Again, who the fuck are you to judge and why should I give a shit what you think? Tell me why does your opinion matter at all?

[Nbadan]

Typical GOP redhearing IMO....in order to protect you from terror, we will commit terror....in order to protect your privacy were going to invade your privacy....in order to stop massive voter fraud (that we never proved even existed) we're going to commit massive voter fraud.....

[ElNono]

This happens every election year... there shouldn't be a problem with photo IDs *if*:

1) The population is educated about the need for such ID well in advance
2) The valid IDs are obtainable without requiring surcharges
3) A proper amount of time is given to obtain one or more of such IDs

Timing is really the key component here. This whole thing gets shady when they file for these laws basically within the year of the election (per par), with little notice, and without enough time to handle the complex cases (ID for another ID, etc).
And, really, that's what happens most of the time. It's difficult to argue it's not disenfranchising when you had 4 years to bring this up and only make your move 10 months before the election.

Obviously, this all obviates the fact that the alleged voter fraud this is supposed to tackle is statistically nearly non-existent. A typical solution looking for a problem.

But going deeper on the psyche of this, I think it has a lot to do with denial of certain part of the electorate when it comes to understanding the demographics shift of the population in this county.

[spurraider21]

let them vote, superdelegates will just negate them anyway tbh fwiw imo

[Aztecfan03]

If you don't drive, don't fly, and don't leave the country, there's not really much of a reason to have a photo ID. You only need a Social Security card to find legal work.
Everywhere I have worked, You need social security card AND photo ID. The only way i can use just one form is with a passport.

[baseline bum]

Everywhere I have worked, You need social security card AND photo ID. The only way i can use just one form is with a passport.

You have never worked an hourly job where all they wanted was a social security card? I worked a few in college and none ever asked for anything more than SS. I'm not talking career level work or an internship where they're trying to hire something more than a warm body, I'm talking about the kind of stuff poor old people and young people would have. Those are the two demographics these voter ID laws are targeting for suppression to chip a couple of percent away.

[DarrinS]

I only have a photo ID because of white privilege, tbh.

[RandomGuy]

Again, who the fuck are you to judge and why should I give a shit what you think? Tell me why does your opinion matter at all?

(shrugs)

I am merely someone with morals that are arguably superior to yours, or if you prefer, some random guy (HA) on the internets. Whether that means you should give a shit depends on whether you consider yourself a decent person, because that might cause you a bit of cognitive dissonance.

I don't really care either way. It is what it is. You are a horrible person, and provably so to a reasonable degree to just about anybody who cares to read a short internet exchange.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=224425&page=11&p=6950515&viewfull=1#post6950515

Not sure what your confusion is on this.

[RandomGuy]

Fascinating but irrelevant to the point being made.

The subject of the OP was GOP policy fraud aimed at disenfranchising Democratic voters. That makes other efforts at disenfranchising Democratic voters relevant. It paints a pattern of organized, unethical behavior on the part of a major political party, the main thrust of the thread.

QED.

Unless, of course you can outline why it is irrelevant, other than the fact you find the fact that the Republican party actively engaging in unethical behavior makes you uncomfortable for some reason, and want to claim it is irrelevant just to nullify it by personal fiat. That isn't how one gets to truth, sophist. Try that in court sometime, see how it works. "Your honor, that weapon used to kill the victim is irrelevant to this murder trial, because I say it is". :lmao

[Aztecfan03]

You have never worked an hourly job where all they wanted was a social security card? I worked a few in college and none ever asked for anything more than SS. I'm not talking career level work or an internship where they're trying to hire something more than a warm body, I'm talking about the kind of stuff poor old people and young people would have. Those are the two demographics these voter ID laws are targeting for suppression to chip a couple of percent away.
I am talking about those type of jobs also. Always needed two forms of ID or a passport.
Not sure if it is the laws of my state, but i live in a democrat-controlled state,

[spurraider21]

I am talking about those type of jobs also. Always needed two forms of ID or a passport.
Not sure if it is the laws of my state, but i live in a democrat-controlled state,
i've needed photo ID for every shitty part time job i've held tbh, from working at the ucla call center to a frozen yogurt shop during high school

[baseline bum]

i've needed photo ID for every shitty part time job i've held tbh, from working at the ucla call center to a frozen yogurt shop during high school

I also worked at the UCLA call center and just needed my Bruin Card to establish I'd get paid the UCLA student wage instead of the standard wage. I know that's a photo ID, but it's not a state issued photo ID like you need to vote with. And I let my state issued photo ID expire because I had no reason to have one without a car in school.

[spurraider21]

I also worked at the UCLA call center and just needed my Bruin Card to establish I'd get paid the UCLA student wage instead of the standard wage. I know that's a photo ID, but it's not a state issued photo ID like you need to vote with. And I let my state issued photo ID expire because I had no reason to have one without a car in school.
:lol no way... fuckin hated that job, but iirc its the highest paying campus job. apparently before my time there callers used to get commission on pledges

[baseline bum]

:lol no way... fuckin hated that job, but iirc its the highest paying campus job. apparently before my time there callers used to get commission on pledges

Yeah, I hated that shit too, but I worked it because it paid higher than anything at Ackerman. Though I only worked it long enough to pay my rent for the quarter. Still, the worst hourly job I had back then was at one of the large video game publishers in the area testing multiplayer connectivity and shit, because 70% of the time there was no work to do and there is nothing worse than being at work with nothing whatsoever to do. Only had to show SS for that job.

[tlongII]

The subject of the OP was GOP policy fraud aimed at disenfranchising Democratic voters. That makes other efforts at disenfranchising Democratic voters relevant. It paints a pattern of organized, unethical behavior on the part of a major political party, the main thrust of the thread.

QED.

Unless, of course you can outline why it is irrelevant, other than the fact you find the fact that the Republican party actively engaging in unethical behavior makes you uncomfortable for some reason, and want to claim it is irrelevant just to nullify it by personal fiat. That isn't how one gets to truth, sophist. Try that in court sometime, see how it works. "Your honor, that weapon used to kill the victim is irrelevant to this murder trial, because I say it is". :lmao

I dunno dude. Seems to me like the Democratic party's practice of awarding superdelegates is aimed disenfranchising democratic voters as well.

[baseline bum]

I dunno dude. Seems to me like the Democratic party's practice of awarding superdelegates is aimed disenfranchising democratic voters as well.

Yeah, both parties doing a bang-up job.

[RandomGuy]

I dunno dude. Seems to me like the Democratic party's practice of awarding superdelegates is aimed disenfranchising democratic voters as well.

Super-delegates do seem to be a bit anti-democratic within the party.

I have to ask: does that keep people from voting in general or local elections?

[tlongII]

Super-delegates do seem to be a bit anti-democratic within the party.

I have to ask: does that keep people from voting in general or local elections?

No it does not. However it does render their vote meaningless. Another thing to remember is that this practice of the Democratic party is actually in place. The "supposed" voter suppression of the Republic party is not.

[boutons_deux]

"The "supposed" voter suppression of the Republic party is not."

:lol

[RandomGuy]

No it does not. However it does render their vote meaningless. Another thing to remember is that this practice of the Democratic party is actually in place. The "supposed" voter suppression of the Republic party is not.

um, no. In case you missed the OP, it isn't "supposed".

The peer-reviewed study in a scientific journal is done on an existing law, and dovetails with other studies done (I presume on other states, haven't read them yet).

You have to substitute "supposed" with "proven" voter suppression efforts, if you value being accurate.

[tlongII]

um, no. In case you missed the OP, it isn't "supposed".

The peer-reviewed study in a scientific journal is done on an existing law, and dovetails with other studies done (I presume on other states, haven't read them yet).

You have to substitute "supposed" with "proven" voter suppression efforts, if you value being accurate.

Since the practice doesn't exist I don't see how you can classify that as "proven".

[spurraider21]

Super-delegates do seem to be a bit anti-democratic within the party.

I have to ask: does that keep people from voting in general or local elections?
it give them the illusion of voting power, which is arguably worse because its more subtle disenfranchisement

[clambake]

fuck all this shit.

you want to win? convince white people to vote for you.


thats it
thats all it takes.

[RandomGuy]

Since the practice doesn't exist I don't see how you can classify that as "proven".

um, voter ID laws don't exist?

http://images-cdn.9gag.com/photo/aw7PBoW_700b.jpg

[RandomGuy]

it give them the illusion of voting power, which is arguably worse because its more subtle disenfranchisement

Bullshit.

Actual, active disenfranchisement is worse by any reasonable definition.

Whatever superdelegates do/are, it doesn't really change the shitty GOP pushed policy that actively disenfranchises Democrats does it?

[spurraider21]

Bullshit.

Actual, active disenfranchisement is worse by any reasonable definition.
no, its worse by your definition. dont try to project your definitions/views on everybody else, it doesn't work that way. when your disenfranchisement is veiled, it is less likely to be realized and fought against. the illusion of freedom is dangerous because you dont fight for freedom when you think you have it


Whatever superdelegates do/are, it doesn't really change the shitty GOP pushed policy that actively disenfranchises Democrats does it?
it doesn't. i never said it did.

but democrats whining about republican voting procedures are akin to the pot calling the kettle black

[boutons_deux]

"its worse by your definition"

Repug voter suppression is OBJECTIVELY active and unrelenting.

see FL 2000,

see the slave, red states that RUSHED to implement voter suppression within hours of the REPUG scotus gutting VRA.

Then there's Repg vote counting fraud (OH 2004)

Repugs are LIARS and CHEATS and anti-American

[tlongII]

um, voter ID laws don't exist?

http://images-cdn.9gag.com/photo/aw7PBoW_700b.jpg

Un, never mind.

[RandomGuy]

Un, never mind.

As you wish. Your point wasn't overly clear. Sorry if the pic was a bit over the top.

[RandomGuy]

no, its worse by your definition. dont try to project your definitions/views on everybody else, it doesn't work that way. when your disenfranchisement is veiled, it is less likely to be realized and fought against. the illusion of freedom is dangerous because you dont fight for freedom when you think you have it


it doesn't. i never said it did.

but democrats whining about republican voting procedures are akin to the pot calling the kettle black

Primaries are party votes. They don't disenfranchise anyone, even if I accede your point about superdelegates subverting the will of Democratic voters.


Disfranchisement (also called disenfranchisement) is the revocation of the right of suffrage (the right to vote) of a person or group of people, or through practices, prevention of a person exercising the right to vote.

The two parties aren't the same, not by a stretch. One is arguably worse then the other in this case, even were I to entirely buy your "superdelegates are disenfranshisement" argument, which I don't.

[spurraider21]

that's fine. you're allowed to disagree

[z0sa]

The superdelegates do indirectly work as a form of voter suppression. People see the numbers and think wow, it is so early and candidate x is just so far behind. What is the point of even voting for them? But it doesnt implicitly discourage them from still voting for the establishment candidate.

But it is not nearly as bad as the active GOP voter suppression which affects off year elections as well and purposely looks to disenfranchise individual voters.

[boutons_deux]

Sixteen States Face New Voting Restrictions in First Election in Fifty Years Without Full Voting Rights Act

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35020-sixteen-states-face-new-voting-restrictions-in-first-election-in-fifty-years-without-full-voting-rights-act

Racist Repug SCOTUS "making America great again", for white supremacists.

[RandomGuy]

that's fine. you're allowed to disagree

Well, you are pretty fucking wrong to try and draw an "equal" sign between super-delegates, that pretty much effect one election every four years, and a deliberate attempt to keep one' party's voters from voting in ANY election.

Especially when the occasional asshat pretty much comes out and admits the real problem is that Democrats vote. If you want to see a couple of rather direct admissions, John Oliver managed to capture a couple.

rHFOwlMCdto

This isn't a case where there is some equality in harm. One party has a very clearly more harmful policy, and lies through its fucking teeth trying to get a dishonest, harmful passed into law for the sole purpose of advancing Republican policies and candidates at the expense of Democrats.

Voter ID laws have been shown to do active harm by peer-reviewed research, and provide little to no actual benefit. The people who got the laws passed lied to get it done.

Do you support repealing the ID laws?

[spurraider21]

Do you support repealing the ID laws?
Yes. I think in theory there's nothing inherent wrong with having people present photo ID in this day and age and the idea isn't inherently racist or whatnot.

However the disparate impact can't be ignored and that law should be put away

[RandomGuy]

Yes. I think in theory there's nothing inherent wrong with having people present photo ID in this day and age and the idea isn't inherently racist or whatnot.

However the disparate impact can't be ignored and that law should be put away

That much we can definitely agree on.

This particular issue has been making me madder the more I read into it. Sorry if I got worked up.

[boutons_deux]

"disparate impact" :lol

there ain't none of that DI.

Voter ID, regs, limiting (early) voting places, days, etc, etc have EXACTLY the direct impact the Repugs/VRWC want:

voter suppression and voter disenfranchisement, both key to Repug electoral success.

disparate? :lol

[Wild Cobra]

Let's just do like they did in the first Iraqi election.

Purple ink on the finger to show you already voted.

Go back to a real polling place. Absentee voting methods can be established again.

[RandomGuy]

Let's just do like they did in the first Iraqi election.

Purple ink on the finger to show you already voted.

Go back to a real polling place. Absentee voting methods can be established again.

In person voting fraud is so rare as to be non-existent.

You already know this.

Why have a government solution that costs any money for a problem that doesn't exist?

[boutons_deux]

A butt standing up for the sanctity of voting

Texas governor helps debunk his own voter-fraud argument

Gov. Greg Abbott (R) yesterday responded (https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/709459377325903872) to Obama’s comments, saying via Twitter, “Texas will continue to crack down on vote fraud.” The tweet included a link to this (http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2016/03/gov-greg-abbott-dismisses-obamas-criticism-says-texas-will-crack-down-on-vote-fraud.html/)Dallas Morning News article about the governor’s position.

And as it turns out, that probably wasn’t a good idea. Steve M. at No More Mister Nice Blog went ahead and clicked on (http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2016/03/next-time-governor-abbott-follow-links.html) the link Abbott included in his message about preventing voter fraud, and found that the Dallas Morning News report told readers that there have been

about 80 cases of voter fraud prosecuted in Texas since 2002, but (http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2016/03/gov-greg-abbott-dismisses-obamas-criticism-says-texas-will-crack-down-on-vote-fraud.html/) “only a handful of those cases involved the kind of in-person voter fraud that Texas’ voter ID law aims to stop.”

The newspaper relied on research that found (http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2016/03/next-time-governor-abbott-follow-links.html) “fewer Texans commit in-person voter fraud than get struck by lightning.”

In other words, while trying to defend needless voting restrictions, the governor emphasized his intention to “crack down on vote fraud.” But at the same time, Abbott pointed at evidence that makes clear he’s cracking down on a problem that doesn’t actually exist.


The Texas Tribune added (http://www.texastribune.org/2016/03/15/analysis-scant-evidence-abbott-rampant-voter-fraud/) yesterday:

The governor of Texas thinks that fraud in the electoral system that put him and others in office is “rampant.”

He can’t back that up.



The article pointed to a comprehensive study that found, since 2000, there are “fewer than three” alleged instances of fraud for every 1 million votes cast in the Lone Star State.

How does that justify a statewide system of voter-suppression tactics?

It doesn’t.

/www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/texas-governor-helps-debunk-his-own-voter-fraud-argument?cid=sm_fb_maddow

TX Repugs stopping in-person voter fraud is as "true" as TX Repugs killing poor women's health care is to protect women's health.