You're asking for more solutions to a problem that doesn't exist, and your solutions will make it more difficult for qualified voters to cast a ballot. If the tradeoff for keeping barriers to legal voting at a minimum is that one person in Virginia will register to vote without going through the proper channels to have her voting right reinstated, and then get caught, then that's a trade most reasonable people would be willing to make.
But let's stop pretending you actually give a .
She was removed from the voter rolls. If VA had their together, she would have been removed earlier.
You know, this all would have been avoided if the damn form said "If you've ever been convicted of a felony, call the election board."
I'm all for that anti-fraud reform.
Voter ID laws would not have prevented this case.
The measures designed to ensure this person doesn't vote already exist.
One man kills 14 people in a movie theater... "Let's not rush to judgment about weapons laws over a single isolated incident."
One woman casts an illegal vote in 2008 and gets caught... "MANDATORY ID CARDS FOR EVERYONE!!"
http://www.salon.com/topic/voter_fraud/
Many have criticized the need for such a bill. After all, there were 11 total instances of voter fraud in Pennsylvania between 2000 and 2008, eight of which were attempted by the same person. But whatever.
...
What might be worse is the Corbett administration’s complete lack of background info on how many people this issue would affect. Around the time the bill was signed, the administration estimated about 1 percent of Pennsylvania residents lacked proper ID to vote.
But last week state officials released the real number: 9.2 percent, or 758,000 registered voters, actually lack proper identification. And in Philadelphia — a Democratic haven, which, along with Pittsburgh, often tips presidential elections — the number lacking proper ID is up around 18 percent, or 186,830 voters.
To put all that in perspective, President Obama won the 2008 election by 620,478 votes, which is less than the number of statewide voters lacking proper ID. Philadelphia alone represented more than 400,000 of that margin. Which has led many locals in the City of Brotherly Love to question the GOP’s motives.
But, it does exist.
I've repeatedly asked how and have yet to get an answer.
How are any of the measures barriers to legal voting?
That is, until late last month when Pennsylvania’s House Majority Leader Mike Turzai let the cat out of the bag: “Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done,” he said at a recent Republican rally to a cheering crowd.
And is dealt with using existing measures, as you so effectively proved.
Thanks for the non sequitur...
Did Felons Put Al Franken in the Senate?
Fraud matters.The six-month election recount that turned former “Saturday Night Live” comedian Al Franken into a U.S. senator may have been decided by convicted felons who voted illegally in Minnesota’s Twin Cities.
That’s the finding of an 18-month study conducted by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group, which found that at least 341 convicted felons in largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul voted illegally in the 2008 Senate race between Franken, a Democrat, and his Republican opponent, then-in bent Sen. Norm Coleman.
The final recount vote in the race, determined six months after Election Day, showed Franken beat Coleman by 312 votes — fewer votes than the number of felons whose illegal ballots were counted, according to Minnesota Majority’s newly released study, which matched publicly available conviction lists with voting records.
[...]
A spokesman for both county attorneys’ offices belittled the information, saying it was “just plain wrong” and full of errors, which prompted the group to go back and start an in-depth look at the records.
“What we did this time is irrefutable,” McGrath said. “We took the voting lists and matched them with conviction lists and then went back to the records and found the roster lists, where voters sign in before walking to the voting booth, and matched them by hand.
“The only way we can be wrong is if someone with the same first, middle and last names, same year of birth as the felon, and living in the same community, has voted. And that isn’t very likely.”
lol conservative dog group
Why isn't the "conservative watchdog group" suing? That's un-american...
Disenfranchising 9%+ of perfectly legal voters in a state matters more.
If you want to talk about real, as opposed to theorized, voter disenfranchisement -- look no further than the Democrats:
The Case Against the New Black Panthers
The Political Cost of Selective RecountsIt was just a year ago, before we knew some truly outrageous details that have since come to light, that Thernstrom was sounding plenty heated herself. In a letter dated June 22, 2009, she scolded Loretta King, the Obama Justice Department’s top civil-rights enforcer, writing that she and other members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights were
No conservative dissent there. Thernstrom, the Commission’s vice-chair, pronounced that the Panthers “were caught on video engaging in voter suppression.” She demanded that this top Justice Department official explain the evidentiary and legal rationale for dismissing such a case.gravely concerned about the Civil Rights Division’s actions in this case and feel strongly that the dismissal of this case weakens the agency’s moral obligation to prevent voting rights violations, including acts of voter intimidation or vote suppression. We cannot understand the rationale for this case’s dismissal and fear that it will confuse the public on how the Department of Justice will respond to claims of voter intimidation.
An attempt to disenfranchise voters in 64 of Florida's 67 counties.Sometimes a decision made in the heat of partisan battle has
reverberations for years to come.
One such decision was the one of Al Gore's campaign to selectively challenge the results of the 2000 election in Florida by demanding hand counts of votes cast in three counties -- Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach. The latter two produce huge majorities for Democratic candidates, and the election officials in charge of the hand counts were Democrats. In other words, Gore sought new counts only in areas where he was likely to gain votes and would not take the risk of a statewide hand count, where those gains might be offset by others for George W. Bush.
We know now that, thanks to the news media consortium that recounted ballots in every Florida county, recounting under any method and any criterion they tested would not have overturned Bush's exceedingly thin plurality.
GOP prods Justice on military vote
Democrat concern for disenfranchisement seems to be restricted only to those they theorize will be disqualified in efforts to keep the truly unqualified from voting.A group of Republican lawyers and law students called Tuesday for the Obama administration to do more to ensure that members of the military are able to cast ballots in the Nov. 2 elections.
David Norcross, chairman of the Republican National Lawyers Association, said in a statement: “The MOVE Act was passed last year to ensure that these brave men and women would have a voice in this fall’s elections. It’s unacceptable that any state would fail to meet that obligation. The Obama administration must act swiftly to guarantee that every service member receives his or her ballot in time to vote.”
lol New Black Panther Party
You've given that dude more exposure than he ever dreamed of.
*ANY* disenfranchising of legal voters *SHOULD* be more important than a handful of alleged fraudulent votes, no matter who does it. Especially, since the system to detect fraudulent voters seems to be working properly (ie: your OP)
But in any case, in none of those examples you provided, people were actually legally denied their right to vote. If anything, you're "hinting" (wink wink) at alleged criminal activity.
Furthermore, there's nothing "theorized" about Pennsylvania's Voter ID law... it's the current law and it's effectively disenfranchising 9% of legal voters on a swing state, no less.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolit...ng-over-id-lawWhen Pennsylvania officials begin their defense of the state's new voter identification law in court Wednesday, they will do so after agreeing to abandon a central argument for why such laws are needed.
In a Pennsylvania court filing, the state says it has never investigated claims of in-person voter fraud and so won't argue that such fraud has occurred in the past. As a result, the state says, it has no evidence that the crime has ever been committed.
The state also says it won't present "any evidence or argument" that in-person voter fraud is likely to occur on Election Day if the voter ID law isn't enacted.
More from the filing, which also was signed by the attorney for the plaintiffs, who are Pennsylvania residents suing to overturn the law:
"There have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states...Respondents will not offer any evidence in this action that in-person voter fraud has in fact occurred in Pennsylvania or elsewhere."
Much like Pennsylvania, Yoni has -- how shall we say? -- an empirically not too well founded fear of voter fraud.
Unlike Yoni, PA does not claim there is any rational basis for that fear, and in the strict political sense it is entirely correct to offer no justification whatsoever. Pandering and hypercriminalization are real.
Last edited by Winehole23; 07-27-2012 at 11:05 AM. Reason: exaggerated; I do not think fear of election fraud is unjustifiable or even without an empirical basis -- but I don't think Yoni can say what it is. As usual, carrying water for his political masters.
They still don't get it.
When there is no checks to see if the voters are legal, there is no way to find the illegal ones, except by chance.
But there are checks. Apparently, as seen in the OP, they're working just fine.
lol not getting it.
They found this one with the checks they already have.
It wasn't chance, it was just slow.
CD lobbing balls here, I think I will let someone else take a crack at it.
a mountain, straining at a gnat.
(the gnat is voter impersonation, elections are the mountain)
Lol, if voter ID was supported by the left I'm sure yonivore would suddenly be against it.
I tried to get yoni to inderstand that .. he ain't so bright
They would be un-american!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote